Objective: To investigate the discriminative power of Nutritional Risk Screening 2002.
Methods: A cross sectional study involving one hundred participants aged ≥60 years. The original and adapted versions of Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 and the Mini Nutritional Assessment were used. Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 adaptation consisted of a lower age cutoff (60 years or older) for addition of one extra point to the final score.
Results: Screening using Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 revealed higher nutritional risk among patients aged ≥70 years (p=0.009), whereas screening using the adapted version of Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 revealed similar nutritional risk in both age groups (60-69 years and ≥70 years; p=0.117). Frequency of nutritional risk was highest when the Mini Nutritional Assessment was administered (52.7%), followed by the adapted and original versions of Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (35.5% and 29.1%, respectively).
Conclusion: The adapted version of Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 was more effective than the original version. However, further studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Objetivo:: Avaliar o poder de discriminação diagnóstica da ferramenta Nutritional Risk Screening 2002.
Métodos:: Estudo transversal com cem participantes com idade ≥60 anos. Foram aplicados o Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 original, o Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 adaptado e o Mini Nutritional Assessment. A adaptação do Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 consistiu em diminuir o critério de idade, incluindo pontuação adicional para 60 anos de idade ou mais.
Resultados:: Maior risco nutricional ocorreu nos ≥70 anos quando aplicado o Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 original (p=0,009), enquanto o Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 adaptado apresentou risco nutricional semelhante em ambos os grupos (60-69 anos e ≥70 anos; p=0,117). A frequência de risco nutricional foi maior no Mini Nutritional Assessment (52,7%), seguido do Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 adaptado (35,5%) e do Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 original (29,1%).
Conclusão:: A adaptação do Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 mostrou-se descritivamente mais eficaz do que a original, porém mais estudos devem ser realizados para confirmar os achados.