Rationale: The PG-SGA is a validated instrument to assess malnutrition and its risk factors. Its patient component, i.e. the PG-SGA Short Form (SF), can be used as screening instrument. In this multicenter study, we aimed to assess diagnostic accuracy of the PG-SGA SF and NRS 2002, in patients at the Internal Medicine ward.Methods: In 192 patients (76.0±13.5 years; 53% female) in 9 Portuguese internal medicine wards, malnutrition risk was assessed by PG-SGA SF and NRS 2002. PG-SGA SF ≤8 was defined as low/medium malnutrition risk and NRS 2002 ≤2 as low risk. PG-SGA SF ≥9 and NRS 2002 ≥3 were defined as high malnutrition risk. Nutritional status was assessed by the full PG-SGA (reference method). Malnutrition was defined as PG-SGA Stage B (moderate/suspected malnutrition) or Stage C (severely malnourished). Diagnostic accuracy was tested by sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and receiver operating curve. Agreement between PG-SGA and NRS-2002 was tested by McNemar’s test and Cohen’s kappa (κ).Results: Forty-six % and 53% were categorized as at risk of malnutrition by PG-SGA SF and NRS 2002, respectively. In total, 55% were malnourished. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of PG-SGA SF and NRS 2002 were 0.84, 1.00, 1.00, 0.83 and 0.74, 0.74, 0.77 and 0.70, respectively. Area under curve of PG-SGA SF and NRS 2002 was 0.987 and 0.778 respectively. McNemar’s test showed no significant disagreement (p=0.86) between PG-SGA SF and NRS 2002. Cohen’s kappa showed weak agreement (κ=0.492; p<0.001) (Table 1).Conclusion: Our findings indicate that in patients at the internal medicine ward, PG-SGA SF shows better diagnostic accuracy than NRS 2002, i.e. better sensitivity and specificity.
LINK
LINK
PURPOSE: Malnutrition is frequent in hospitalized patients and is related to functional decline and poorer clinical outcomes. The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is a globally implemented malnutrition tool. We aimed to perform a linguistic and content validation of the translation and cultural adaptation of the PG-SGA for the Spanish language setting.METHODS: This study was conducted in Mexico and Spain. Cancer patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) of both countries were enrolled. We followed the 10 steps of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Principles. Patients and HCPs evaluated comprehensibility (Item: I-CI, Scale: S-CI) and difficulty (Item: I-DI, Scale: S-DI) of the Spanish version of the PG-SGA. HCPs also evaluated content validity (i.e., relevance) of the Spanish PG-SGA (Item: I-CVI, Scale: S-CVI). The data were collected by a questionnaire.RESULTS: The study enrolled 84 HCPs and 196 cancer patients from both countries. HCPs rated comprehensibility and difficulty of the professional component as excellent (S-CI = 0.95, S-DI = 0.92), and content validity of the full PG-SGA also as excellent. Patients rated comprehensibility (S-CI) and difficulty (S-DI) of the patient-generated component, that is, the PG-SGA Short Form, as "excellent" (S-CI = 0.98 and S-DI = 0.98).CONCLUSION: Translation and cultural adaptation of the PG-SGA to the Spanish setting according to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Principles resulted in an instrument perceived as clear and easy to complete by cancer patients and relevant by HCPs to assess the nutritional status.
