These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Can phase angle determined by bioelectrical impedance analysis assess nutritional risk? A comparison between healthy and hospitalized subjects.
    Author: Kyle UG, Soundar EP, Genton L, Pichard C.
    Journal: Clin Nutr; 2012 Dec; 31(6):875-81. PubMed ID: 22560739.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND & 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° and 4.6° 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/L had a relative risk of 7.5 to have low PhA compared to patients with ≥35 g/L CONCLUSIONS: 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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]