Is the Utility of the GLIM Criteria Used to Diagnose Malnutrition Suitable for Bicultural Populations? Findings from Life and Living in Advanced Age Cohort Study in New Zealand (LiLACS NZ)

Abstract

jats:titleAbstract</jats:title>jats:sec jats:titleObjectives</jats:title> jats:pTo investigate associations between nutrition risk (determined by SCREEN-II) and malnutrition (diagnosed by the GLIM criteria) with five-year mortality in Māori and non-Māori of advanced age.</jats:p> </jats:sec>jats:sec jats:titleDesign</jats:title> jats:pA longitudinal cohort study.</jats:p> </jats:sec>jats:sec jats:titleSetting</jats:title> jats:pBay of Plenty and Lakes regions of New Zealand.</jats:p> </jats:sec>jats:sec jats:titleParticipants</jats:title> jats:p255 Māori; 400 non-Māori octogenarians.</jats:p> </jats:sec>jats:sec jats:titleMeasurements</jats:title> jats:pAll participants were screened for nutrition risk using the Seniors in the Community: Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition (SCREEN-II). Those at high nutrition risk (SCREEN-II score <49) had the Global Leadership Initiative in Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria applied to diagnose malnutrition or not. Demographic, physical and health characteristics were obtained by trained research nurses using a standardised questionnaire. Five-year mortality was calculated from Government data. The association of nutrition risk (SCREEN-II) and a malnutrition diagnosis (GLIM) with five-year mortality was examined using logistic regression and cox proportional hazard models of increasing complexity.</jats:p> </jats:sec>jats:sec jats:titleResults</jats:title> jats:p56% of Māori and 46% of non-Māori participants had low SCREEN-II scores indicative of nutrition risk. The prevalence of GLIM diagnosed malnutrition was lower for both Māori and non-Māori (15% and 19% of all participants). Approximately one-third of participants (37% Māori and 32% non-Māori) died within the five-year follow-up period. The odds of death for both Māori and non-Māori was significantly lower with greater SCREEN II scores (better nutrition status), (OR (95% CI); 0.58 (0.38, 0.88), P < 0.05 and 0.53 (0.38, 0.75), P < 0.001, respectively). GLIM diagnosed malnutrition was not significantly associated with five-year mortality for Māori (OR (95% CI); 0.88 (0.41, 1.91), P >0.05) but was for non-Māori. This association remained significant after adjustment for other predictors of death (OR (95% CI); 0.50 (0.29, 0.86), P< 0.05). Reduced food intake was the only GLIM criterion predictive of five-year mortality for Māori (HR (95% CI); 10.77 (4.76, 24.38), P <0.001). For non-Māori, both aetiologic and phenotypic GLIM criteria were associated with five-year mortality.</jats:p> </jats:sec>jats:sec jats:titleConclusion</jats:title> jats:pNutrition risk, but not malnutrition diagnosed by the GLIM criteria was significantly associated with mortality for Māori. Conversely, both nutrition risk and malnutrition were significantly associated with mortality for non-Māori. Appropriate phenotypic criteria for diverse populations are needed within the GLIM framework.</jats:p> </jats:sec>