Evidence Hub

The prevalence of malnutrition and impact on patient outcomes among older adults presenting at an Irish emergency department: a secondary analysis of the OPTI-MEND trial

A. Griffin, A. O'Neill, M. O'Connor, D. Ryan, A. Tierney, R. Galvin

BMC Geriatrics, 2020

353 participants · 46 citations

Abstract

Background Malnutrition is common among older adults and is associated with adverse outcomes but remains undiagnosed on healthcare admissions. Older adults use emergency departments (EDs) more than any other age group. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and factors associated with malnutrition on admission and with adverse outcomes post-admission among older adults attending an Irish ED. Methods Secondary analysis of data collected from a randomised controlled trial exploring the impact of a dedicated team of health and social care professionals on the care of older adults in the ED. Nutritional status was determined using the Mini Nutritional Assessment- short form. Patient parameters and outcomes included health related quality of life, functional ability, risk of adverse health outcomes, frailty, hospital admissions, falls history and clinical outcomes at index visit, 30-day and 6-month follow up. Aggregate anonymised participant data linked from index visit to 30-days and 6-month follow-up were used for statistical analysis. Results Among 353 older adults (mean age 79.6 years (SD = 7.0); 59.2% ( n = 209) female) the prevalence of malnutrition was 7.6% ( n = 27) and ‘risk of malnutrition’ was 28% ( n = 99). At baseline, those who were malnourished had poorer quality of life scores, functional ability, were more frail, more likely to have been hospitalised or had a fall recently, had longer waiting times and were more likely to be discharged home from the ED than…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 353 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free