Is the Utility of the GLIM Criteria Used to Diagnose Malnutrition Suitable for Bicultural Populations? Findings from Life and Living in Advanced Age Cohort Study in New Zealand (LiLACS NZ)

CC BY 4.0
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Abstract

Objectives To investigate associations between nutrition risk (determined by SCREEN-II) and malnutrition (diagnosed by the GLIM criteria) with five-year mortality in Māori and non-Māori of advanced age. Design A longitudinal cohort study. Setting Bay of Plenty and Lakes regions of New Zealand. Participants 255 Māori; 400 non-Māori octogenarians. Measurements All participants were screened for nutrition risk using the Seniors in the Community: Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition (SCREEN-II). Those at high nutrition risk (SCREEN-II score <49) had the Global Leadership Initiative in Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria applied to diagnose malnutrition or not. Demographic, physical and health characteristics were obtained by trained research nurses using a standardised questionnaire. Five-year mortality was calculated from Government data. The association of nutrition risk (SCREEN-II) and a malnutrition diagnosis (GLIM) with five-year mortality was examined using logistic regression and cox proportional hazard models of increasing complexity. Results 56% of Māori and 46% of non-Māori participants had low SCREEN-II scores indicative of nutrition risk. The prevalence of GLIM diagnosed malnutrition was lower for both Māori and non-Māori (15% and 19% of all participants). Approximately one-third of participants (37% Māori and 32% non-Māori) died within the five-year follow-up period. The odds of death for both Māori and non-Māori was significantly lower with greater SCREEN II scores (better nutrition status), (OR (95% CI); 0.58 (0.38, 0.88), P < 0.05 and 0.53 (0.38, 0.75), P < 0.001, respectively). GLIM diagnosed malnutrition was not significantly associated with five-year mortality for Māori (OR (95% CI); 0.88 (0.41, 1.91), P >0.05) but was for non-Māori. This association remained significant after adjustment for other predictors of death (OR (95% CI); 0.50 (0.29, 0.86), P< 0.05). Reduced food intake was the only GLIM criterion predictive of five-year mortality for Māori (HR (95% CI); 10.77 (4.76, 24.38), P <0.001). For non-Māori, both aetiologic and phenotypic GLIM criteria were associated with five-year mortality. Conclusion Nutrition risk, but not malnutrition diagnosed by the GLIM criteria was significantly associated with mortality for Māori. Conversely, both nutrition risk and malnutrition were significantly associated with mortality for non-Māori. Appropriate phenotypic criteria for diverse populations are needed within the GLIM framework.

Keywords

Advanced age, GLIM, SCREEN-II, malnutrition screening, mortality, Aged, 80 and over, Humans, Cohort Studies, Longitudinal Studies, New Zealand, Leadership, Malnutrition, Nutritional Status, Nutrition Assessment

Citation

J Nutr Health Aging, 2023, 27 (1), pp. 67 - 74

Collections

Journal Articles

Full item page