1. Nutrition risk: cultural aspects of assessment.
- Author
-
Wham CA, Dyall L, Teh RO, and Kerse NM
- Subjects
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Mass Index, Cross-Sectional Studies, Cultural Characteristics, Feasibility Studies, Female, Health Services for the Aged, Humans, Male, Malnutrition etiology, Malnutrition prevention & control, New Zealand epidemiology, Nursing Homes, Risk, Surveys and Questionnaires, Malnutrition epidemiology
- Abstract
Aim: To assess a nutrition risk screening tool amongst Maori and non-Maori of advanced age., Method: A cross sectional feasibility study was conducted in three North Island locations. One hundred and eight community-living residents aged 75- 85 years were assessed for nutrition risk using 'the validated questionnaire 'Seniors in the Community: Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition', Version II (SCREENII) and level of physical activity using the 'Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly' (PASE). Physical assessments included height and weight., Results: Fifty-two percent of participants were assessed to be at high nutrition risk (SCREENII score <50; range 29-58; out of maximum score 64). Nutrition risk factors amongst Maori and non-Maori respectively differed for weight change in the previous six months (45.2% and 18.7%, p=0.005), skipping meals (54.8% and 13.3%, p<0.001), fruit and vegetable intake (77.4% and 18.7%, p<0.001) and the use of meal replacements (28.1% and 9.3%, p=0.013). Process evaluation showed that Maori took different meaning from the individual question items in SCREENII. Level of physical activity (PASE score) was higher for Maori, median (IQR): 125 (74) than non-Maori, 72 (74) (p<0.001) especially for leisure-time and household related activity. BMI was higher for Maori median (IQR): 31.5 kg/m2 (6.8) compared to non-Maori 24.7 kg/m2 (5.4) (p<0.001)., Conclusions: The nutrition risk tool suggested that Maori were at high risk for malnutrition despite higher BMI and higher levels of activity. Several items of the screening tool were interpreted differently among Maori compared to non-Maori. Further development is needed to ensure accurate assessment.
- Published
- 2011