Search

Background: Better tools are needed to diagnose and identify children at risk of clinical malnutrition., Objectives: We aimed to compare body composition (BC) and malnutrition screening tools (MSTs) for detecting malnutrition on admission; and examine their ability to predict adverse clinical outcomes [increased length of stay (LOS) and complications] in complex pediatric patients., Methods: This was a prospective study in children 5-18 y old admitted to a tertiary pediatric hospital (n = 152). MSTs [Pediatric Yorkhill Malnutrition Score (PYMS), Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Pediatrics (STAMP), and Screening Tool for Risk of Impaired Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONGkids)] were completed on admission. Weight, height, and BC [fat mass (FM) and lean mass (LM) by DXA] were measured (n = 118). Anthropometry/BC and MSTs were compared with each other and with clinical outcomes., Results: Subjects were significantly shorter with low LM compared to reference data. Depending on the diagnostic criteria used, 3%-17% were classified as malnourished. Agreement between BC/anthropometric parameters and MSTs was poor. STAMP and STRONGkids identified children with low weight, LM, and height. PYMS, and to a lesser degree STRONGkids, identified children with increased LOS, as did LM compared with weight or height. Patients with complications had lower mean ± SD LM SD scores (-1.38 ± 1.03 compared with -0.74 ± 1.40, P < 0.05). In multivariable models, PYMS high risk and low LM were independent predictors of increased LOS (OR: 3.76; 95% CI: 1.36, 10.35 and OR: 3.69; 95% CI: 1.24, 10.98, respectively). BMI did not predict increased LOS or complications., Conclusions: LM appears better than weight and height for predicting adverse clinical outcomes in this population. BMI was a poor diagnostic parameter. MSTs performed differently in associations to BC/anthropometry and clinical outcomes. PYMS and LM provided complementary information regarding LOS. Studies on specific patient populations may further clarify the use of these tools and measurements., (Copyright © The Author(s) on behalf of the American Society for Nutrition 2020.)

Background: A routine pediatric clinical assessment of body composition is increasingly recommended but has long been hampered by the following 2 factors: a lack of appropriate techniques and a lack of reference data with which to interpret individual measurements. Several techniques have become available, but reference data are needed., Objective: We aimed to provide body-composition reference data for use in clinical practice and research., Design: Body composition was measured by using a gold standard 4-component model, along with various widely used reference and bedside methods, in a large, representative sample of British children aged from 4 to ≥20 y. Measurements were made of anthropometric variables (weight, height, 4 skinfold thicknesses, and waist girth), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, body density, bioelectrical impedance, and total body water, and 4-component fat and fat-free masses were calculated. Reference charts and SD scores (SDSs) were constructed for each outcome by using the lambda-mu-sigma method. The same outcomes were generated for the fat-free mass index and fat mass index., Results: Body-composition growth charts and SDSs for 5-20 y were based on a final sample of 533 individuals. Correlations between SDSs by using different techniques were ≥0.68 for adiposity outcomes and ≥0.80 for fat-free mass outcomes., Conclusions: These comprehensive reference data for pediatric body composition can be used across a variety of techniques. Together with advances in measurement technologies, the data should greatly enhance the ability of clinicians to assess and monitor body composition in routine clinical practice and should facilitate the use of body-composition measurements in research studies.

Aim The aim of this study was to develop, systematically, a consensus-based definition for 'neurodisability' that is meaningful to health professionals and parents of children with neurological conditions. Method A multidisciplinary group of health professionals was recruited through child development teams and professional societies in the UK; several parents of children with neurological conditions worked with the research team. Professionals participated in three rounds of a Delphi survey. Participants rated their agreement with a proposed definition in each round, and feedback was used to refine the definition. Finally, a perspective was sought from international experts. Results Responses to the three rounds were as follows: round 1, 245 out of 290 (84.4%); round 2, 242 out of 300 (80.6%); and round 3, 237 out of 297 (79.7%). Agreement with the proposed definition was extremely high in every round (89.0%, 90.1%, and 93.6% respectively). The final version of the definition was widely endorsed among professionals, parents, and a small number of international colleagues. The final definition is as follows: 'Neurodisability describes a group of congenital or acquired long-term conditions that are attributed to impairment of the brain and/or neuromuscular system and create functional limitations. A specific diagnosis may not be identified. Conditions may vary over time, occur alone or in combination, and include a broad range of severity and complexity. The impact may include difficulties with movement, cognition, hearing and vision, communication, emotion, and behaviour'. Interpretation An agreed definition of neurodisability will be useful for conducting research or clinical evaluations with people affected by neurological problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author offers a medical opinion on the use of the term global developmental delay (GDD) when diagnosing developmental coordination disabilities in children. She points out that the term does not differentiate between significant gross motor and fine motor developmental delays and does not recognize the fact a delay in one area does not necessarily mean delay in the other such as in the case of neuro-muscular diseases. She recommends the use of a more precise identification of children with delay (ICD) to describe specific developmental disabilities.