Use of PNRS as a screening tool

Oct 13, 2025 by pynkocean.com 43 views

Comparison of the Suitability of the Screening Tool for Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP) and Pediatric Nutritional Risk Score (PNRS) with Anthropometric Examination as a Malnutrition Hospital Tapis Test in Children

Introduction

Hospital Malnutrition (MRS) in children who are hospitalized in hospitals is an important concern in the world of health. This is caused by the negative impacts caused by morbidity, mortality, duration of maintenance, and the cost of health services. With the increasing number of malnutrition among children who are treated, a simple and effective filter test device is needed to detect the risk of malnutrition early. In this article, we will discuss the comparison of two screening tools namely Stamp (Screening Tool for Assessment of Malnutrition In Paediatrics) and PNRS (Pediatric Nutritional Risk Score) with anthropometric examination as a Malnutrition Tapis test in hospitals.

Background

Malnutrition in children is a significant public health concern worldwide. It is estimated that over 150 million children under the age of 5 suffer from malnutrition, leading to increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. In hospitals, malnutrition can exacerbate the condition of children, prolong their stay, and increase the risk of complications. Therefore, early detection and assessment of malnutrition are crucial to provide timely and effective interventions.

This study was conducted in the Children's Ward and Children's Surgery H Adam Malik Hospital Medan from February to July 2014, involving children aged 2 to 18 years who were hospitalized for more than 72 hours. All children who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria were screened using stamps and PNRS, as well as height and weight measurement at the time of admission. Weight measurements were repeated on the third day, seventh, and before discharge. The results of the stamp and PNRS were compared to assessing the level of suitability with anthropometric data.

Methods and Results

A total of 127 children were screened using both tools. The results show that PNRS has a small level of compatibility with anthropometric measurement (κ = 0.175; p = 0.028), while the stamp also shows a low but insignificant compatibility (κ = 0.080; p = 0.193). Both show a positive correlation with the length of treatment, where PNRS provides a better correlation than the stamp (r = 0.218; p = 0.014 vs r = 0.188; p = 0.034). The prevalence of hospital malnutrition found in this study reached 40.9%.

Additional Analysis and Explanation

The results showed that although the two screening tools did not provide strong compatibility with anthropometric data, PNRS had an advantage in detecting the risk of malnutrition compared to stamps. This low level of suitability can be caused by various factors, including the characteristics of a limited population in this study and complexity in identifying malnutrition in children who often have factors that interact with each other.

The PNRS is a widely used screening tool for malnutrition in children, which takes into account various factors such as age, sex, weight, height, and clinical signs of malnutrition. The stamp, on the other hand, is a more recent tool that uses a combination of anthropometric and clinical data to assess malnutrition. While both tools have their strengths and limitations, the results of this study suggest that PNRS may be a more effective tool in detecting the risk of malnutrition in hospitals.

Conclusion

Overall, this study shows that the Pediatric Nutritional Risk Score (PNRS) has a better level of suitability than a stamp in identifying the risk of malnutrition in hospitals in children. With a high prevalence of malnutrition, a deeper understanding of screening tools and the application of the right method is very important to improve the treatment and care of children who experience malnutrition in hospitals. The development of a more precise and efficient screening tool needs to be done to reduce the number of malnutrition in children, in order to support their optimal growth and development.

Recommendations

Based on the results of this study, the following recommendations are made:

Use of PNRS as a screening tool: PNRS should be used as a screening tool for malnutrition in children in hospitals, as it has been shown to be more effective in detecting the risk of malnutrition compared to stamps.
Combination of screening tools: A combination of PNRS and anthropometric examination may be a more effective approach in identifying the risk of malnutrition in hospitals.
Development of a more precise screening tool: Further research is needed to develop a more precise and efficient screening tool for malnutrition in children.
Education and training: Medical personnel should receive education and training on the use of PNRS and anthropometric examination to improve the detection and assessment of malnutrition in children.

Limitations

This study has several limitations, including:

Small sample size: The sample size of this study was relatively small, which may limit the generalizability of the results.
Limited population: The study was conducted in a single hospital, which may limit the generalizability of the results to other hospitals and populations.
Complexity of malnutrition: Malnutrition in children is a complex condition that can be influenced by various factors, including genetics, environment, and socioeconomic status.

Future Directions

Future studies should aim to:

Develop a more precise screening tool: Further research is needed to develop a more precise and efficient screening tool for malnutrition in children.
Validate the use of PNRS: The use of PNRS as a screening tool should be validated in larger and more diverse populations.
Investigate the effectiveness of combination screening tools: The effectiveness of combination screening tools, such as PNRS and anthropometric examination, should be investigated in larger and more diverse populations.

By understanding the strengths and limitations of different screening tools, healthcare providers can make informed decisions about the best approach to detect and assess malnutrition in children.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the Comparison of the Suitability of the Screening Tool for Assessment of Malnutrition in Paediatrics (STAMP) and Pediatric Nutritional Risk Score (PNRS) with Anthropometric Examination as a Malnutrition Hospital Tapis Test in Children

Q: What is the purpose of this study?

A: The purpose of this study is to compare the suitability of two screening tools, STAMP and PNRS, with anthropometric examination as a malnutrition hospital tapis test in children.

Q: What are the main findings of this study?

A: The main findings of this study are that PNRS has a better level of suitability than STAMP in identifying the risk of malnutrition in hospitals in children. PNRS also shows a positive correlation with the length of treatment, while STAMP does not.

Q: What are the limitations of this study?

A: The limitations of this study include a small sample size, limited population, and complexity of malnutrition in children.

Q: What are the recommendations of this study?

A: The recommendations of this study are to use PNRS as a screening tool for malnutrition in children in hospitals, to combine PNRS and anthropometric examination as a more effective approach, and to develop a more precise and efficient screening tool for malnutrition in children.

Q: What are the implications of this study for healthcare providers?

A: The implications of this study for healthcare providers are that they should use PNRS as a screening tool for malnutrition in children in hospitals, and that they should receive education and training on the use of PNRS and anthropometric examination to improve the detection and assessment of malnutrition in children.

Q: What are the future directions of this study?

A: The future directions of this study are to develop a more precise screening tool for malnutrition in children, to validate the use of PNRS as a screening tool, and to investigate the effectiveness of combination screening tools.

Q: What are the potential applications of this study?

A: The potential applications of this study are to improve the detection and assessment of malnutrition in children in hospitals, to reduce the prevalence of malnutrition in children, and to support the optimal growth and development of children.

Q: What are the potential benefits of this study?

A: The potential benefits of this study are to improve the health outcomes of children in hospitals, to reduce the risk of complications and mortality in children with malnutrition, and to support the optimal growth and development of children.

Q: What are the potential challenges of this study?

A: The potential challenges of this study are to develop a more precise and efficient screening tool for malnutrition in children, to validate the use of PNRS as a screening tool, and to investigate the effectiveness of combination screening tools.

Q: What are the potential future research directions of this study?

A: The potential future research directions of this study are to investigate the effectiveness of combination screening tools, to develop a more precise and efficient screening tool for malnutrition in children, and to validate the use of PNRS as a screening tool.

Q: What are the potential implications of this study for policy and practice?

A: The potential implications of this study for policy and practice are to improve the detection and assessment of malnutrition in children in hospitals, to reduce the prevalence of malnutrition in children, and to support the optimal growth and development of children.

Q: What are the potential benefits of this study for children and families?

A: The potential benefits of this study for children and families are to improve the health outcomes of children in hospitals, to reduce the risk of complications and mortality in children with malnutrition, and to support the optimal growth and development of children.