1. Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: A modified Delphi approach.
- Author
-
Jensen, Gordon L., Cederholm, Tommy, Ballesteros‐Pomar, Maria D., Blaauw, Renee, Correia, M. Isabel T. D., Cuerda, Cristina, Evans, David C., Fukushima, Ryoji, Gautier, Juan Bernardo Ochoa, Gonzalez, M. Cristina, van Gossum, Andre, Gramlich, Leah, Hartono, Joseph, Heymsfield, Steven B., Jager‐Wittenaar, Harriët, Jayatissa, Renuka, Keller, Heather, Malone, Ainsley, Manzanares, William, and McMahon, M. Molly
- Subjects
MUSCLE mass ,WEIGHT loss ,MALNUTRITION ,BODY mass index ,INFLAMMATION ,C-reactive protein ,REVISION (Writing process) ,NUTRITIONAL status - Abstract
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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF