Evaluation of different screening tools as the first step of the GLIM framework: A cross‐sectional study of Chinese cancer patients in an outpatient setting

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAmbulatory cancer patients are at high risk of malnutrition. Multiple nutrition screening and assessment tools are used in the outpatient setting. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of different nutrition screening tools as the first step of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) framework in Chinese ambulatory cancer patients.MethodsA cross‐sectional study was conducted in a tertiary hospital in China. Malnutrition diagnoses made by the GLIM framework using Malnutrition Screening Tool, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool, Nutritional Risk Screening 2002, or short‐form of Patient‐Gernerated Subjective Global Assessment (PG‐SGA) as the first step were compared with PG‐SGA separately.ResultsOf the 562 included patients, 31.0% were diagnosed with malnutrition (PG‐SGA: B + C), and 12.6% were diagnosed with severe malnutrition (PG‐SGA: C). As the screening tool in the first step of the GLIM framework, the short form of PG‐SGA (PG‐SGA SF) with a cutoff value of ≥2 performed best in diagnosing malnutrition, with good sensitivity (SE) (80.5% [73.6–85.9]) and specificity (SP) (98.4% [96.5–99.4]) and substantial accordance (κ = 0.826), whereas PG‐SGA SF with a cutoff value of ≥4 performed best in diagnosing severe malnutrition, with fair SE (62.0% [49.6–73.0]), good SP (96.7% [94.6–98.1]) and moderate accordance (κ = 0.629).ConclusionUsing PG‐SGA as the standard, the GLIM framework using PG‐SGA SF as the screening tool has good accordance with the PG‐SGA regardless of severity grading. PG‐SGA SF can be used as a valid screening tool in the GLIM framework.