Can phase angle determined by bioelectrical impedance analysis assess nutritional risk? A comparison between healthy and hospitalized subjects
Can phase angle determined by bioelectrical impedance analysis assess nutritional risk? A comparison between healthy and hospitalized subjects
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.clnu.2012.04.002
复制
发表时间：
2012-12-01
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Pichard, Claude
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kyle, Ursula G.;Soundar, Esther P.;Pichard, Claude
背景目的：生物电阻抗分析（BIA）显示，低相位角（PhA）与发病率和营养风险增加有关。本研究确定了住院患者中PhA与营养风险筛查（NRS-2002）和主观总体评估（SGA）的临界值，并评估了PhA与血清白蛋白之间的关系。方法：对患者(男性（M)/女性(W) = 382/267）以及年龄、性别和身高匹配的健康对照进行PhA测定。计算PhA与NRS-2002、SGA和血清白蛋白的敏感性和特异性。截断值采用接收算子特征曲线下面积（ROC-AUC）评估。结果：最佳PhA切断度分别为M/W 5.0度和4.6度。NRS-2002的敏感性为70.0/58.1% (M/W)；SGA: 73.3 / 64.5%;白蛋白:58.8 / 23.5%;NRS-2002特异性为85.1/81.7% (M/W)；SGA: 76.6/76.1%，白蛋白：93.2/96.6%。PhA的ROC-AUC为0.85/0.80 (M/W)；SGA: 0.83/0.80，白蛋白：0.85/0.91。结论：PhA与三种筛查工具的敏感性和特异性一致，增强了我们研究的有效性。PhA似乎是一种有用的筛选工具，可以在不测量体重或身高的情况下评估营养风险。(C) 2012爱思唯尔有限公司和欧洲临床营养与代谢学会。版权所有。
Background Er aims: Low phase angle (PhA) by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), is associated with increased morbidity and nutritional risk. This study determined the cut-off values for PhA compared to Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS-2002) and Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) in patients at hospital admission, and evaluated the association between PhA and serum albumin.Methods: PhA was determined in patients (Men (M)/Women (W) = 382/267), and healthy age-, sex- and height-matched controls. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for PhA compared to NRS-2002, SGA and serum albumin. The cut-off values were assessed by receiver operator characteristics area under the curve (ROC-AUC).Results: The best PhA cut-offs were 5.0 degrees and 4.6 degrees in M/W. The sensitivity for NRS-2002 was 70.0/58.1% (M/W); SGA: 73.3/64.5%; albumin: 58.8/23.5%; specificity for NRS-2002: 85.1/81.7%.(M/W); SGA: 76.6/76.1% and albumin: 93.2/96.6%. The PhA showed a ROC-AUC for NRS-2002 of 0.85/0.80 (M/W); SGA: 0.83/0.80 and albumin: 0.85/0.91. Patients with albumin levels = 35 g/LConclusions: The consistent sensitivity and specificity between PhA and three screening tools strengthens the validity of our study. PhA appears to be a useful screening tool to assess nutritional risk without having to measure weight or height. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.