Optimización del cribado nutricional cipa: ¿son necesarios dos parámetros proteicos? / Optimisation of nutritional screening tool CIPA: are two parameters of protein really necessary?

RESUMEN

Introducción: el cribado nutricional CIPA (control de ingestas, proteínas, antropometría) preliminar es positivo cuando se cumple uno de los siguientes parámetros control de ingestas (CI) 48-72 h < 50%, albúmina < 3 g/dl, proteínas totales < 5 g/dl, índice de masa corporal (IMC) < 18,5 kg/m2 o circunferencia del brazo (CB) ≤ 22,5 cm (cuando el paciente no se puede pesar/tallar). El uso de dos parámetros proteicos aumenta costes y complejidad, pudiendo suprimirse uno de ellos sin afectar su validez. Objetivos: evaluar la efectividad del cribado CIPA tras exclusión de proteínas totales. Métodos: estudio prospectivo de pacientes hospitalizados valorando prevalencia o riesgo de desnutrición a través de CIPA y valoración global subjetiva (VGS). Análisis de desnutrición hospitalaria según el cribado CIPA completo (con proteínas totales y albúmina, CIPAc) y sin proteínas totales (CIPAs/p), y análisis de la concordancia entre ambos métodos. Estudio de la asociación del resultado positivo del cribado con factores pronósticos. Resultados: se analizaron 343 pacientes. Prevalencia de desnutrición CIPAc 38,19% (33,02-43,36), CIPAs/p 37,32% (32,17-42,46), VGS 29,15% (24,32-33,99). Índice de correlación Kappa 0,981 entre ambos CIPA, p < 0,001. Tanto las dos versiones de CIPA como la VGS detectan pacientes con mayor mortalidad hospitalaria y al mes del alta. Reingreso precoz mayor en CIPA positivo, estadísticamente significativo en CIPAs/p (cribado positivo 21,88% vs. negativo 13,49%, p = 0,044), VGS 20,01% vs. 15,23%, p = 0,28. Estancia media superior en pacientes con cribado positivo en las dos variantes de CIPA y en VGS. Conclusiones: CIPAs/p es igual o más eficaz que CIPAc validado previamente, por lo que puede sustituir a este último ahorrando costes. La prevalencia de desnutrición es elevada en ambas variantes y son capaces de identificar al paciente con peor pronóstico clínico

ABSTRACT

Introduction: the preliminary nutritional screening tool CIPA (food intake, proteins, anthropometry) is positive when it fulfills one of the following control food intake (CI) 48-72 h < 50%, albumin < 3 g/dl, total protein < 5 g/dl, body mass index (BMI) < 18,5 kg/m2 or mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) ≤ 22,5 cm. The use of two protein parameters increases costs and difficulty; one of them can be suppressed without affecting validity. Objectives: to evaluate the effectiveness of screening CIPA after exclusion of total protein. Method: prospective study of hospitalized patients; prevalence or risk of malnutrition was evaluated through CIPA and Subjective Global Assessment (SGA). Hospital malnutrition according to complete CIPA screening (with total proteins and albumin, [CIPAc] and without total proteins [CIPAw/p]) and concordance between both methods were analyzed, as well as the association of the positive screening result with clinical outcomes. Results: three hundred and forty-three patients were analyzed. The prevalence or risk of malnutrition identified by complete CIPA (c) was 38.19% (33.02-43.36); by CIPA without protein (w/p), 37.32% (32.17-42.46); and SGA was 29.15% (24.32-33.99). Kappa index 0.981 between both CIPAs, p < 0.001. Both CIPA and SGA detect patients with higher mortality in hospital and one month after discharge. Early readmission was higher in positive CIPA, statistical significantly in CIPAw/p (screening with positive results 21.88% vs screening with negative results 13.49%, p = 0.044), SGA 20.01% vs 15.23%, p = 0.28. Length of stay was higher in patients with positive screening in CIPAc, CIPAw/p and SGA. Conclusions: CIPAw/p is equally or more effective than the previously validated full CIPA; therefore, it could replace the latter saving costs. The prevalence of malnutrition is high in both variants and they are able to predict which patient has worse clinical prognosis