P511 - A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF NUTRITIONAL ASSESSMENT USING GLOBAL LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE ON MALNUTRITION VERSUS SUBJECTIVE GLOBAL ASSESSMENT IN MAINTENANCE OF HEMODIALYSIS PATIENTS

P511

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF NUTRITIONAL ASSESSMENT USING GLOBAL LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE ON MALNUTRITION VERSUS SUBJECTIVE GLOBAL ASSESSMENT IN MAINTENANCE OF HEMODIALYSIS PATIENTS

A. R. PR^1,2,*, T. Jayasri³, N. Balakrishna⁴

¹Nutrition And Dietetics, Chief Dietician ,Continental Hospitals, ²Food Science And Nutrition, PhD,Scholar,BESTIU, ³Dietician, ⁴Statistics, HOD, Hyderabad, India

Rationale: Malnutrition is a common complication in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (HD). Nutritional screening tools may be useful for identifying patients at a nutritional risk. Our aim was to compare the concurrent validity of the subjective global assessment and GLIM criteria for malnutrition in maintenance hemodialysis patients.

Methods: This prospective comparative study included 100 outpatients with a mean age of 56.1±15.44 years and a median dialysis vintage of  2 years undergoing HD.SGA and GLIM tools were assessed for their validity in diagnosing malnutrition.Nutritional assessments ,etiological criteria and phenotypic criteria were performed .GLIM and SGA using the following combinations of one Phenotypic and one Etiologic criteria were used.Since all patients had acute or chronic active disease and low muscle mass as per handgrip method we take them as a sample for the GLIM criteria. All nutritional scores were strongly associated with malnutrition

Results: 100 patients (73% male and 27% female) were evaluated.As per GLIM Phenotypic criteria reduced muscle mass measured by the handgrip method showed a sensitivity of 88.8 % specificity of 55.4% and accuracy of 62%. Cohen’s kappa coefficient (k) showed” moderate “ agreement between GLIM and SGA( k 0.41),sensitivity 44% specificity 92.7% and accuracy 84%,AUC 0.728 showed as acceptable.According to SGA 17% were Severely malnourished ,while GLIM criteria says 55% were Severely malnourished.

Conclusion: Among HD patients, the GLIM group showed a higher percentage of severely malnourished patients than the SGA group. Considering the specific criteria used for measuring malnutrition, the GLIM may be more useful or equal in this clinical setting, and the GLIM malnutrition assessment seems acceptable in HD patients.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared