Validity and user-friendliness of the minimal eating observation and nutrition form - version II (MEONF - II) for undernutrition risk screening.
OBJECTIVE
To analyze the criterion-related validity and user-friendliness of the Minimal Eating Observation and Nutrition Form - Version II (MEONF - II) and Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) in relation to the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). In addition, the effect of substituting body mass index (BMI) with calf circumference (CC) was explored for the MEONF-II.


METHODS
The study included 100 patients who were assessed for nutritional status with the MNA (full version), considered here to be the gold standard, and screened with the MUST and the MEONF-II. The MEONF-II includes assessments of involuntary weight loss, BMI (or calf circumference), eating difficulties, and presence of clinical signs of undernutrition.


RESULTS
The MEONF-II sensitivity (0.73) and specificity (0.88) were acceptable. Sensitivity and specificity for the MUST were 0.57 and 0.93, respectively. Replacing the BMI with CC in the MEONF-II gave similar results (sensitivity 0.68, specificity 0.90). Assessors considered MEONF-II instructions and items to be relevant, easy to understand and complete (100%), and the questions to be relevant (98%). MEONF-II and MUST took 8.8 and 4.7 minutes to complete, respectively, and both were considered relevant and easy to finish. In addition, MEONF-II was thought to reveal problems that allows for nursing interventions.


CONCLUSIONS
The MEONF-II is an easy to use, relatively quick, and sensitive screening tool to assess risk of undernutrition among hospital inpatients, which allows for substituting BMI with CC in situations where measures of patient height and weight cannot be easily obtained. High sensitivity is of primary concern in nutritional screening and the MEONF-II outperforms the MUST in this regard.
Central Hospital, Kristianstad, Sweden.
Christina
C
Vallén
Peter
P
Hagell
Albert
A
Westergren
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Aug;51(8):1120-4
12890076
Nutr Clin Pract. 2008 Aug-Sep;23(4):388-96
18682590
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007 Dec;62(12):1389-92
18166690
J Nutr Health Aging. 2009 Nov;13(9):782-8
19812868
Clin Nutr. 2003 Aug;22(4):415-21
12880610
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
843571
Public Health Nutr. 2005 Aug;8(5):468-79
16153328
J Nutr Health Aging. 2009 Jan;13(1):6-12
19151901
J Nutr Health Aging. 2009 Feb;13(2):159-64
19214346
Proc Nutr Soc. 2005 Aug;64(3):313-7
16048662
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2001 Jun;55(6):482-92
11423925
J Clin Nurs. 2008 May;17(9):1211-8
18266849
BMJ. 2003 Sep 27;327(7417):716-9
14512479
Clin Geriatr Med. 2002 Nov;18(4):737-57
12608501
Br J Nutr. 2004 Nov;92(5):799-808
15533269
Nutr Rev. 1996 Jan;54(1 Pt 2):S59-65
8919685
J R Soc Med. 2005 Sep;98(9):411-4
16140852
Gerontology. 2002 May-Jun;48(3):162-9
11961370
Nutrition. 1999 Feb;15(2):116-22
9990575
Int J Nurs Stud. 2002 Mar;39(3):341-51
11864657
Br J Nurs. 2008 Nov 13-26;17(20):1269-73
19043330
Nutr Res. 2009 Nov;29(11):761-7
19932864