Search

Background The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) approach to malnutrition diagnosis is based on assessment of three phenotypic (weight loss, low body mass index, and reduced skeletal muscle mass) and two etiologic (reduced food intake/assimilation and disease burden/inflammation) criteria, with diagnosis confirmed by fulfillment of any combination of at least one phenotypic and at least one etiologic criterion. The original GLIM description provided limited guidance regarding assessment of inflammation, and this has been a factor impeding further implementation of the GLIM criteria. We now seek to provide practical guidance for assessment of inflammation. Methods A GLIM-constituted working group with 36 participants developed consensus-based guidance through a modified Delphi review. A multiround review and revision process served to develop seven guidance statements. Results The final round of review was highly favorable, with 99% overall “agree” or “strongly agree” responses. The presence of acute or chronic disease, infection, or injury that is usually associated with inflammatory activity may be used to fulfill the GLIM disease burden/inflammation criterion, without the need for laboratory confirmation. However, we recommend that recognition of underlying medical conditions commonly associated with inflammation be supported by C-reactive protein (CRP) measurements when the contribution of inflammatory components is uncertain. Interpretation of CRP requires that consideration be given to the method, reference values, and units (milligrams per deciliter or milligram per liter) for the clinical laboratory that is being used. Conclusion Confirmation of inflammation should be guided by clinical judgment based on underlying diagnosis or condition, clinical signs, or CRP., De två första författarna delar förstaförfattarskapet

The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) provides consensus criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition that can be widely applied. The GLIM approach is based on the assessment of three phenotypic (weight loss, low body mass index, and low skeletal muscle mass) and two etiologic (low food intake and presence of disease with systemic inflammation) criteria, with diagnosis confirmed by any combination of one phenotypic and one etiologic criterion fulfilled. Assessment of muscle mass is less commonly performed than other phenotypic malnutrition criteria, and its interpretation may be less straightforward, particularly in settings that lack access to skilled clinical nutrition practitioners and/or to body composition methodologies. In order to promote the widespread assessment of skeletal muscle mass as an integral part of the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition, the GLIM consortium appointed a working group to provide consensus-based guidance on assessment of skeletal muscle mass. When such methods and skills are available, quantitative assessment of muscle mass should be measured or estimated using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, computerized tomography, or bioelectrical impedance analysis. For settings where these resources are not available, then the use of anthropometric measures and physical examination are also endorsed. Validated ethnic- and sex-specific cutoff values for each measurement and tool are recommended when available. Measurement of skeletal muscle function is not advised as surrogate measurement of muscle mass. However, once malnutrition is diagnosed, skeletal muscle function should be investigated as a relevant component of sarcopenia and for complete nutrition assessment of persons with malnutrition.

More perceived physical fatigability and poor diet quality are associated with impairments in physical function in older adults. However, the degree to which more perceived fatigability explains the association between poor diet quality and low physical function is unknown. We examined this relationship in 122 (66F, 56M) of the oldest-old participants from the Geisinger Rural Aging Study (GRAS). We used 24-h dietary recalls to assess the Healthy Eating Index (HEI), the Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale (PFS, 0–50) to assess perceived physical fatigability, and the PROMIS Physical Function 20a* to assess physical function. We grouped participants into three age categories: 80–84 (n = 51), 85–89 (n = 51), and 90+ (n = 20) years. Multiple linear regression revealed that a lower HEI was associated with higher PFS Physical score after adjusting for age group, sex, body mass index, and the number of medical conditions (p = 0.001). Several macro- and micro-nutrient intakes were also lower in those reporting more (≥15) compared to less (<15) perceived physical fatigability. Mediation analysis revealed that PFS Physical scores explained ~65% (p = 0.001) of the association between HEI total score and PROMIS19 Physical Function score. Poor diet quality may contribute to more perceived physical fatigability, which could exacerbate impairments in the oldest-old’s physical function.