Why the study?
Does the Mini Nutritional Assessment predict gait status and mortality 6 months after hip fracture in elderly patients?
Does the Mini Nutritional Assessment predict gait status and mortality 6 months after hip fracture in elderly patients?
The Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) is a significant predictor of gait status and mortality 6 months after hip fracture in elderly patients, highlighting the importance of nutritional stratification.
MNA may support risk stratification for gait and survival after hip fracture; hypothesis-generating for nutritional interventions in prospective studies.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), the Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS) 2002 and the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Score (ASA) as predictors of gait status and mortality 6 months after hip fracture. A total of eighty-eight consecutive patients over the age of 65 years with hip fracture admitted to an orthopaedic unit were prospectively evaluated. Within the first 72 h of admission, each patient's characteristics were recorded, and the MNA, the NRS 2002 and the ASA were performed. Gait status and mortality were evaluated 6 months after hip fracture. Of the total patients, two were excluded because of pathological fractures. The remaining eighty-six patients (aged 80·2 (sd 7·3) years) were studied. Among these patients 76·7 % were female, 69·8 % walked with or without support and 12·8 % died 6 months after the fracture. In a multivariate analysis, only the MNA was associated with gait status 6 months after hip fracture (OR 0·773, 95 % CI 0·663, 0·901; P= 0·001). In the Cox regression model, only the MNA was associated with mortality 6 months after hip fracture (hazard ratio 0·869, 95 % CI 0·757, 0·998; P= 0·04). In conclusion, the MNA best predicts gait status and mortality 6 months after hip fracture. These results suggest that the MNA should be included in the clinical stratification of patients with hip fracture to identify and treat malnutrition in order to improve the outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gumieiro et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: