Background: Multiple studies demonstrated that nutritional risk and malnutrition were associated with prolonged hospitalization, extended rehabilitation duration, and increased mortality among patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVD). However, current research on dietary behaviors and nutritional status in hospitalized CVD patients remains insufficient. Objective: This study systematically evaluated the concordance between cardiology inpatients’ and clinicians’ subjective nutritional status assessments and objective energy and protein intake achievement rates, while comprehensively investigating the multidimensional associations among Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002), Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM), blood parameters, and dietary intake. Methods: This study adopted a cross-sectional design to investigate hospitalized patients in the department of cardiology. Dietary knowledge and behavior data were collected through questionnaires, and actual dietary intake was recorded. Nutritional risk assessment and malnutrition diagnosis were performed for all inpatients. Differences between subjective evaluations and actual intake were compared, and the correlation between blood biochemical indicators and nutritional status was analyzed. Results: The study enrolled 618 valid cases, with male and female patients accounting for 67.48% and 32.52%, respectively. The patients’ age was 61.89 ± 12.88 years. The NRS 2002 score was 3.01 ± 0.94, with 132 inpatients diagnosed with malnutrition according to GLIM criteria. Energy and protein intake reached only 63.09 ± 18.23% and 74.98 ± 22.86% of target values, respectively. NRS 2002 showed significant correlations with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), C-reactive protein (CRP), albumin (ALB), etc. No significant difference was found between physician and inpatient evaluations (χ2 = 1.465, p < 0.05). Both ordinal and multivariable logistic regression analyses demonstrated significant discrepancies between subjective assessments (inpatient perceptions and physician evaluations) and objective energy and protein intake levels (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Hospitalized cardiovascular patients commonly exhibited insufficient nutritional intake and limited dietary awareness. A mismatch existed between patient/clinician perceptions and objectively assessed nutritional intake. Subjective evaluations could not accurately reflect actual nutritional status, necessitating enhanced nutritional monitoring—including nutritional risk screening, biochemical testing, and dietary surveys—along with personalized interventions. Future efforts should enhance collaboration between clinicians and dietitians to improve patients’ nutritional status and clinical prognosis.
Li et al. (Wed,) studied this question.