Paediatric nutrition risk scores in clinical practice: children with inflammatory bowel disease
Article first published online: 16 MAY 2012
© 2012 The Authors. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics © 2012 The British Dietetic Association Ltd
Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics
Volume 25, Issue 4, pages 319–322, August 2012
How to Cite
Wiskin, A. E., Owens, D. R., Cornelius, V. R., Wootton, S. A. and Beattie, R. M. (2012), Paediatric nutrition risk scores in clinical practice: children with inflammatory bowel disease. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 25: 319–322. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-277X.2012.01254.x
- Issue published online: 17 JUL 2012
- Article first published online: 16 MAY 2012
- inflammatory bowel disease;
- nutrition risk;
- nutrition risk screening;
How to cite this article Wiskin A.E., Owens D.R., Cornelius V.R., Wootton S.A. & Beattie R.M. (2012) Paediatric nutrition risk scores in clinical practice: children with inflammatory bowel disease. J Hum Nutr Diet. 25, 319–322
Background: There has been increasing interest in the use of nutrition risk assessment tools in paediatrics to identify those who need nutrition support. Four non-disease specific screening tools have been developed, although there is a paucity of data on their application in clinical practice and the degree of inter-tool agreement.
Methods: The concurrent validity of four nutrition screening tools [Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP), Screening Tool for Risk On Nutritional status and Growth (STRONGkids), Paediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS) and Simple Paediatric Nutrition Risk Score (PNRS)] was examined in 46 children with inflammatory bowel disease. Degree of malnutrition was determined by anthropometry alone using World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) criteria.
Results: There was good agreement between STAMP, STRONGkids and PNRS (kappa > 0.6) but there was only modest agreement between PYMS and the other scores (kappa = 0.3). No children scored low risk with STAMP, STRONGkids or PNRS; however, 23 children scored low risk with PYMS. There was no agreement between the risk tools and the degree of malnutrition based on anthropometric data (kappa < 0.1). Three children had anthropometry consistent with malnutrition and these were all scored high risk. Four children had body mass index SD scores < −2, one of which was scored at low nutrition risk.
Conclusions: The relevance of nutrition screening tools for children with chronic disease is unclear. In addition, there is the potential to under recognise nutritional impairment (and therefore nutritional risk) in children with inflammatory bowel disease.