Zoekresultaten

Linguistic and content validation of the translated and culturally adapted patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA)

The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is an instrument to screen, assess and monitor malnutrition and risk factors, and to triage for interventions. After having translated and culturally adapted the original PG-SGA for the Italian setting, according to International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Principles, we tested linguistic validity, i.e., perceived comprehensibility and difficulty, and content validity (relevance) of the Italian version of the PG-SGA in patients with cancer and a multidisciplinary sample of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Methods: After the translation and cultural adaptation of the original PG-SGA for the Italian setting, the patient component (i.e., PG-SGA Short Form (SF) was tested for linguistic validity (i.e., comprehensibility ad difficulty) in 120 Italian patients with cancer and 81 Italian HCPs. The full PG-SGA, i.e., patient and professional component of the PG-SGA, was tested for content validity, i.e., relevance, in 81 Italian HCPs. The data were collected by a questionnaire and evaluations were operationalized by a 4-point scale. Through item and scale indices we evaluated the comprehensibility (I–CI, S–CI), difficulty (I-DI, S-DI) and content validity (I-CVI, S-CVI). Scale indices 0.80–0.89 were considered acceptable, and scale indices ≥0.90 were considered excellent. Results: Patients perceived comprehensibility and difficulty of the PG-SGA SF (Boxes) as excellent (S–CI = 0.98, S-DI = 0.96). Professionals perceived comprehensibility of the professional component (Worksheets) as excellent (S–CI = 0.92), difficulty as acceptable (S-DI = 0.85), and content validity of the full PG-SGA as excellent (S-CVI = 0.92). Dietitians gave higher scores (indicating better scores) on comprehensibility, difficulty, and content validity of Worksheet 4 (physical exam) than the other professions. In Worksheet 4, four items were considered most difficult to complete and were considered below acceptable range. Relevance was perceived as excellent by professionals for both the patient component (S-CVI = 0.93) and the professional component (S-CVI = 0.90), resulting in S-CVI = 0.92 for the full PG-SGA. Slight textual modifications were implemented resulting in the final version of the Italian PG-SGA. Conclusions: Translation and cultural adaptation of the original PG-SGA resulted in the Italian version of the PG-SGA that maintained its original purpose and meaning and can be completed adequately and easily by patients and professionals. The Italian PG-SGA is considered relevant for screening, assessing and monitoring malnutrition and risk factors, as well as triaging for interventions by Italian HCPs.

Feasibility of the patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA) in long-stay nursing home residents

In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the feasibility of completing the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) in long-stay nursing home residents.

Does training improve perceived comprehensibility, difficulty and content validity of the Portuguese Scored PG-SGA?

Translation, cultural adaptation, and assessment of the linguistic and content validity of the PG-SGA to the Spanish linguistic setting by cancer patients and healthcare professionals

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.

Diagnostic accuracy of the PG-SGA short form and NRS 2002 in internal medicine ward

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.

Malnutrition screening on hospital admission: impact of overweight and obesity on comparative performance of MUST and PG-SGA SF

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Traditional malnutrition screening instruments, including the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), strongly rely on low body mass index (BMI) and weight loss. In overweight/obese patients, this may result in underdetection of malnutrition risk. Alternative instruments, like the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form (PG-SGA SF), include characteristics and risk factors irrespective of BMI. Therefore, we aimed to compare performance of MUST and PG-SGA SF in malnutrition risk evaluation in overweight/obese hospitalized patients.SUBJECTS/METHODS: We assessed malnutrition risk using MUST (≥1 = increased risk) and PG-SGA SF (≥4 = increased risk) in adult patients at hospital admission in a university hospital. We compared results for patients with BMI < 25 kg/m 2 vs. BMI ≥ 25 kg/m 2. RESULTS: Of 430 patients analyzed (58 ± 16 years, 53% male, BMI 26.9 ± 5.5 kg/m 2), 35% were overweight and 25% obese. Malnutrition risk was present in 16% according to MUST and 42% according to PG-SGA SF. In patients with BMI < 25 kg/m 2, MUST identified 31% as at risk vs. 52% by PG-SGA SF. In patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m 2, MUST identified 5% as at risk vs. 36% by PG-SGA SF. Agreement between MUST and PG-SGA SF was low (к = 0.143). Of the overweight/obese patients at risk according to PG-SGA SF, 83/92 (90%) were categorized as low risk by MUST. CONCLUSIONS: More than one-third of overweight/obese patients is at risk for malnutrition at hospital admission according to PG-SGA SF. Most of them are not identified by MUST. Awareness of BMI-dependency of malnutrition screening instruments and potential underestimation of malnutrition risk in overweight/obese patients by using these instruments is warranted.