Comparison of Subjective Global Assessment and Protein Energy Wasting Score to Nutrition Evaluations Conducted by Registered Dietitian Nutritionists in Identifying Protein Energy Wasting Risk in Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the 7-point subjective global assessment (SGA) and the protein energy wasting (PEW) score with nutrition evaluations conducted by registered dietitian nutritionists in identifying PEW risk in stage 5 chronic kidney disease patients on maintenance hemodialysis. DESIGN AND METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional study entitled "Development and Validation of a Predictive energy Equation in Hemodialysis". PEW risk identified by the 7-point SGA and the PEW score was compared against the nutrition evaluations conducted by registered dietitian nutritionists through data examination from the original study (reference standard). SUBJECTS: A total of 133 patients were included for the analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV), positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR and NLR) of both scoring tools were calculated when compared against the reference standard. RESULTS: The patients were predominately African American (n = 112, 84.2%), non-Hispanic (n = 101, 75.9%), and male (n = 80, 60.2%). Both the 7-point SGA (sensitivity = 78.6%, specificity = 59.1%, PPV = 33.9%, NPV = 91.2%, PLR = 1.9, and NLR = 0.4) and the PEW score (sensitivity = 100%, specificity = 28.6%, PPV = 27.2%, NPV = 100%, PLR = 1.4, and NLR = 0) were more sensitive than specific in identifying PEW risk. The 7-point SGA may miss 21.4% patients having PEW and falsely identify 40.9% of patients who do not have PEW. The PEW score can identify PEW risk in all patients, but 71.4% of patients identified may not have PEW risk. CONCLUSIONS: Both the 7-point SGA and the PEW score could identify PEW risk. The 7-point SGA was more specific, and the PEW score was more sensitive. Both scoring tools were found to be clinically confident in identifying patients who were actually not at PEW risk.

Abbreviated Steady State Intervals for Measuring Resting Energy Expenditure in Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Indirect calorimetry requires a steady state (SS) protocol to determine measured resting energy expenditure (mREE). Achieving stringent criteria for an SS interval may be difficult for patients on maintenance hemodialysis (MHD), as they may become uncomfortable because of the test itself or their health status. The study aim was to explore if a shortened SS interval was within acceptable limits for bias and precision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this cross-sectional secondary analysis, adults (N = 125) who received MHD thrice weekly were enrolled. The indirect calorimetry test was performed for a length of total time ≤30 consecutive minutes. SS was evaluated in accordance with intervals of 10, 5, 4, 3, and 2 minutes. The mREE at the 10-minute SS was compared with the mREE at 5, 4, 3, and 2 minutes, via t tests and Bland-Altman analysis, to determine degree of bias and level of agreement. The a priori alpha level was set at ≤0.5. RESULTS: The sample was primarily male, African American, and non-Hispanic, with a mean ± SD age of 55.4 ± 12.2 years, who reported being on MHD for an average of 62.4 ± 74.3 months. None of the mREE measures were significantly different from that of the 10-minute SS interval. Seventy-two percent of the participants were able to achieve SS at the 10-minute interval, 83.2% at 5 minutes, 87.2% at 4 minutes, and 89.6% for both 3 and 2 minutes. CONCLUSION: For patients on MHD, an abbreviated SS interval of <10 minutes (eg, 5 minutes) yielded valid mREE measurements.