董莉萍 周莎
[摘要] 目的 探討NRS2002評(píng)分對(duì)慢性腎臟病患者壓力性損傷的預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值。方法 回顧性分析2017年6月至2019年6月在武漢市第四醫(yī)院腎內(nèi)科住院的146例慢性腎臟病患者的臨床資料,采用Spearman相關(guān)分析評(píng)估營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查2002(NRS2002)評(píng)分與慢性腎臟病患者壓力性損傷相關(guān)性,Logistic回歸分析患者壓力性損傷的相關(guān)危險(xiǎn)因素,利用受試者工作曲線(ROC)對(duì)NRS2002評(píng)分壓力性損傷預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值進(jìn)行分析。結(jié)果 入選的146例患者住院期間發(fā)生壓力性損傷93例(63.7%)。未發(fā)生壓力性損傷患者的NRS2002評(píng)分為(3.22±1.49)分,顯著低于壓力性損傷組的(5.29±1.45)分,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)。依據(jù)患者NRS2002評(píng)分1~2分、3~4分以及5~7分設(shè)為三組,隨著NRS2002評(píng)分的增加,壓力性損傷的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)亦越高,三組患者壓力性損傷發(fā)生率分別為12.7%、53.5%和84%,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.001);多元logistic回歸分析顯示NRS2002評(píng)分每增加1分,患者發(fā)生壓力性損傷的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)增加4.52倍;其預(yù)測(cè)壓力性損傷的AUC為0.829,95%CI為0.762~0.897,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.001)。同時(shí)血清白蛋白每增加1g/L,患者壓力性損傷風(fēng)險(xiǎn)可降低16.1%(OR=0.839,95%CI:0.704~0.998)。結(jié)論 高NRS2002評(píng)分是慢性腎臟病患者發(fā)生壓力性損傷的獨(dú)立危險(xiǎn)因素,對(duì)是否發(fā)生壓力性損傷有較準(zhǔn)確的預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值。
[關(guān)鍵詞] 營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查2002;慢性腎臟病;壓力性損傷;白蛋白
[中圖分類號(hào)] R692? ? ? ? ? [文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼] A? ? ? ? ? [文章編號(hào)] 1673-9701(2022)05-0008-05
[Abstract] Objective To explore the predictive value of the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) score for risk of pressure injury in patients with chronic kidney disease. Methods The clinical data of 146 patients with chronic kidney disease hospitalized in the department of nephrology of Department of Nephrology, the Fourth Hospital of Wuhan from June 2017 to June 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The correlation between the NRS2002 score and pressure injury in patients with chronic kidney disease was assessed by Spearman correlation analysis. The risk factors associated with pressure injury in patients were analyzed by logistic regression analysis, and the predictive value of the NRS2002 score for pressure injury was analyzed using the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). Results In the selected 146 patients, 93 cases (63.7%) had pressure injuries during hospitalization. The NRS2002 score (3.22±1.49)points of patients without pressure injury was significantly lower than(5.29±1.45)points of the pressure injury group, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Patients were divided into three groups based on NRS2002 scores of 1 to 2, 3 to 4, and 5 to 7. As the NRS2002 score increases, the risk of pressure injury was higher. The incidence of pressure injury in the three groups is 12.7%, respectively, 53.5% and 84%, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001); multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that for every 1 point increase in NRS2002 score, the patient’s risk of pressure injury increased by 4.52 times; its predictive AUC of pressure injury was 0.829 , 95%CI is 0.762-0.897, the difference is statistically significant (P<0.001). At the same time, for every 1g/L increase in serum albumin, the risk of pressure injury in patients can be reduced by 16.1% (OR=0.839, 95%CI: 0.704-0.998). Conclusion A high NRS2002 score is an independent risk factor for the development of pressure injury in patients with chronic kidney disease and has a relatively accurate predictive value for the occurrence of pressure injury.
[Key words] Nutritional risk screening 2002; Chronic kidney disease; Pressure injury; Albumin
營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查是營(yíng)養(yǎng)管理過程中的重要步驟,但容易被醫(yī)務(wù)人員忽視。營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查2002(nutrition risk screening,NRS2002)是建立在128項(xiàng)隨機(jī)對(duì)照試驗(yàn)基礎(chǔ)上的營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查工具,在國際上廣泛使用,適用于住院患者的營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查,NRS2002用于篩查與臨床結(jié)局相關(guān)的營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)[1]。中華醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)腸內(nèi)腸外營(yíng)養(yǎng)學(xué)分會(huì)推薦使用NRS2002作為住院患者營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查的首選工具。營(yíng)養(yǎng)不良是慢性病住院患者主要并發(fā)癥之一,尤其是慢性腎臟病(chronic kidney disease, CKD)等[2]。慢性腎臟病患者由于飲食限制,高氮質(zhì)血癥、代謝性酸中毒等導(dǎo)致患者出現(xiàn)蛋白能量消耗,約41%存在營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn),39%被診斷為營(yíng)養(yǎng)不良[3]。營(yíng)養(yǎng)不良是壓力性損傷的內(nèi)在危險(xiǎn)因素,特別是體重下降、攝入不足、低白蛋白血癥、體質(zhì)量指數(shù)(body mass index, BMI)<18.5 kg/m2[4]。本研究旨在通過使用NRS 2002評(píng)分篩查慢性腎臟病住院患者的營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn),探討營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查評(píng)分與壓力性損傷的相關(guān)性及其預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值,現(xiàn)報(bào)道如下。
1? 資料與方法
1.1? 一般資料
本研究選取2017年6月至2019年6月在武漢市第四醫(yī)院腎內(nèi)科首次住院患者的資料進(jìn)行回顧性分析。納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①明確存在慢性腎臟病者[5];②住院1 d以上,神志清楚可以配合篩查,自愿接受篩查者。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①住院天數(shù)≤1 d者;②不能配合或拒絕篩查者。本研究最終共有146例患者完成篩查并納入數(shù)據(jù)分析。參照改善全球腎臟病預(yù)后組織(kidney disease: improving global outcomes, KDIGO)2012年指南CKD分期標(biāo)準(zhǔn),按照腎小球?yàn)V過率(glomerular filtration rate, GFR)分為5期:1期:GFR≥90 ml/(min·1.73m2);2期:GFR 60~89 ml/(min·1.73m2);3期:GFR 30~59 ml/(min·1.73m2);4期:GFR 15~29 ml/(min·1.73m2);5期:GFR<15 ml/(min·1.73m2)。
1.2? 方法
1.2.1? 營(yíng)養(yǎng)篩查及測(cè)量方法? ①在患者入院24 h內(nèi)使用NRS2002對(duì)患者進(jìn)行營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查[6],評(píng)分包括疾病嚴(yán)重程度評(píng)分、營(yíng)養(yǎng)狀況評(píng)分和年齡評(píng)分3個(gè)部分,總評(píng)分為3項(xiàng)的總和,范圍0~7分,評(píng)分≥3分認(rèn)為患者存在營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn),進(jìn)一步行營(yíng)養(yǎng)評(píng)定,根據(jù)疾病應(yīng)激系數(shù)計(jì)算總熱量需求量,及三大產(chǎn)能營(yíng)養(yǎng)素各自的需求量,指導(dǎo)患者正確進(jìn)餐,若經(jīng)口進(jìn)食不能滿足,合并給予腸外營(yíng)養(yǎng)支持。②營(yíng)養(yǎng)生化指標(biāo):所有入組患者空腹采血并進(jìn)行生化檢查,包括血紅蛋白(hemoglobin, HGB)、血清白蛋白(albumin, ALB)等。
1.2.2? 壓力性損傷的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)? 壓力性損傷(pressure ulcer, PU),是指發(fā)生在皮膚和(或)潛在皮下軟組織的局限性損傷,通常發(fā)生在骨隆突處或皮膚與醫(yī)療設(shè)備接觸處。壓力性損傷的分級(jí):本研究采用國際 壓力性損傷分級(jí)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)(national pressure ulcer advisory panel, NPUAP),Ⅰ期:指壓不能變白紅腫;Ⅱ期真皮層部分缺損;Ⅲ期:全皮膚層缺損;Ⅳ期:組織全層缺損;不可分期:皮膚全層或組織全程缺損---深度未知;可疑深部組織損傷---深度未知[7]。
1.3? 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法
將問卷調(diào)查表的數(shù)據(jù)由兩人分別錄入Epidata數(shù)據(jù)庫,并檢查錄入數(shù)據(jù)的一致性。采用SPSS 25.0及R 3.6.3版本軟件進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)分析。計(jì)量資料采用均數(shù)±標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差(x±s)表示,兩組間均數(shù)比較采用t檢驗(yàn),三組間的均數(shù)比較采用方差分析。計(jì)數(shù)資料采用[n(%)]表示,組間比較采用χ2檢驗(yàn)。壓力性損傷與NRS2002評(píng)分相關(guān)性分析采用Spearman相關(guān)性分析。采用logistic回歸檢測(cè)與NRS2002評(píng)分是否獨(dú)立于傳統(tǒng)的壓力性損傷危險(xiǎn)因素,包括年齡、性別、高血壓史、糖尿病史、冠心病史和肺部感染史。以優(yōu)勢(shì)比(odds ratio,OR)和95%可信區(qū)間(confidence interval, CI)來表示相對(duì)危險(xiǎn)度。對(duì)檢測(cè)結(jié)果以靈敏度為縱軸,誤診率為橫軸,制作NRS2002評(píng)分預(yù)測(cè)壓力性損傷的ROC曲線,對(duì)曲線下部的面積(area under curve, AUC)和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)誤進(jìn)行計(jì)算。面積0.5~0.7時(shí),判斷的準(zhǔn)確性較低,面積0.7~0.9時(shí),具有一定的準(zhǔn)確性,面積>0.9時(shí),診斷具有較高的準(zhǔn)確性。做ROC曲線分析時(shí),根據(jù)SPSS包提供Youden指數(shù)最大的截?cái)帱c(diǎn)對(duì)應(yīng)的界值作為壓力性損傷的預(yù)測(cè)界值,分別計(jì)算其預(yù)測(cè)壓力性損傷發(fā)生的靈敏度,特異度和準(zhǔn)確性。ROC曲線及趨勢(shì)性直方圖采用Graphpad 8.0軟件進(jìn)行繪制。P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2? 結(jié)果
2.1? 兩組患者臨床一般資料比較
共納入146例慢性腎臟病患者,其中無壓力性損傷53例為對(duì)照組,93例為壓力性損傷組。壓力性損傷組與對(duì)照組臨床基線資料分析表明,相比對(duì)照組患者,壓力性損傷組的血清白蛋白為(30.20±5.57)g/L,低于對(duì)照組的(34.25±5.12)g/L;壓力性損傷患者的下床活動(dòng)率為17.39%,低于對(duì)照組的60.38%;壓力性損傷組的NRS2002評(píng)分為(5.29±1.45)分,高于對(duì)照組的(3.22±1.49)分(P<0.001)。見表1。
2.2? 不同NRS2002評(píng)分患者的臨床資料比較
為進(jìn)一步探討NRS2002評(píng)分與臨床結(jié)局相關(guān)性,本研究按NRS2002評(píng)分高低分成三組:1~2分(n=24);3~4分(n=41);5~7分(n=81)。隨著NRS2002評(píng)分增加,患者血清白蛋白含量逐漸降低,壓力性損傷發(fā)生率及不能下床活動(dòng)比率均逐漸增加(P<0.001)(表2)。與低NRS2002評(píng)分(≤2分)相比,高NRS 2002評(píng)分(≥5分)的壓力性損傷發(fā)生率增加5.72倍。Spearman相關(guān)性分析表明NRS2002評(píng)分與壓力性損傷相關(guān)系數(shù)r=0.566(P<0.001)。見圖1。
2.3? 臨床參數(shù)與壓力性損傷的logistic回歸分析
將與壓力性損傷相關(guān)的各指標(biāo)(血清白蛋白、NRS2002評(píng)分、自主下床活動(dòng))引入logistic回歸方程,經(jīng)逐步選擇提示:NRS2002是壓力性損傷的獨(dú)立危險(xiǎn)因素。NRS2002評(píng)分每增加1分,患者發(fā)生壓力性損傷的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)增加4.52倍(95%CI:1.92~10.6,P=0.001)。見表3。
2.4? NRS2002評(píng)分與壓力性損傷風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的相關(guān)性
進(jìn)一步logistic回歸分析提示,NRS2002評(píng)分越高,患者壓力性損傷風(fēng)險(xiǎn)逐漸增加,患者壓力性損傷發(fā)生率顯著增高(P=0.0051)。見圖2。
2.5? NRS2002評(píng)分對(duì)壓力性損傷的臨床預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值
受試者工作特征曲線分析結(jié)果顯示,AUC為0.829,95%CI為0.762~0.897(P<0.001)。提示其預(yù)測(cè)診斷價(jià)值高,有臨床預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值。取新變量的ROC曲線上Youden指數(shù)最大的截?cái)帱c(diǎn),得出最佳診斷界值為0.40,即NRS2002評(píng)分為4.5分時(shí),其預(yù)測(cè)發(fā)生壓力性損傷的敏感度為73.1%,特異度為75.5%。見圖3。
3 討論
本研究顯示未發(fā)生壓力性損傷組患者NRS2002評(píng)分顯著低于壓力性損傷組患者(P<0.001)。而且與低NRS2002評(píng)分(≤2分)相比,高NRS2002評(píng)分(≥5分)壓力性損傷發(fā)生率增加5.72倍。Spearman相關(guān)分析進(jìn)一步證實(shí)NRS2002評(píng)分與壓力性損傷發(fā)生關(guān)系密切(r=0.566,P<0.001)。這表明NRS2002評(píng)分作為一種簡(jiǎn)潔、有效、易于開展的方法可推廣應(yīng)用于識(shí)別潛在壓力性損傷高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的患者。
營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)指現(xiàn)存的或潛在的營(yíng)養(yǎng)和代謝狀況所導(dǎo)致的疾?。ɑ蚴中g(shù))后出現(xiàn)不利的臨床結(jié)局的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),強(qiáng)調(diào)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)是指可能出現(xiàn)與營(yíng)養(yǎng)因素相關(guān)的不利的臨床結(jié)局(如并發(fā)癥等)[8]。
歐洲壓力性損傷患病率為18%[9],英國、美國和加拿大的壓力性損傷患病率為5%~32%,而日本和中國的醫(yī)院人群中壓力性損傷患病率為1%~3%[10-11],不同國家發(fā)病率不一致的原因可能與不同的患者群體和使用不同的壓力性損傷評(píng)估方法有關(guān),但都強(qiáng)調(diào)盡早進(jìn)行壓力性損傷的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)評(píng)估,減少壓力性損傷在住院期間的發(fā)生發(fā)展。因?yàn)閴毫π該p傷一旦形成,可使患者的住院時(shí)間平均增加10.8 d[12],老年患者的死亡率增加4倍以上[13]。壓力性損傷護(hù)理與診治與醫(yī)院護(hù)理質(zhì)量密切相關(guān),早期發(fā)現(xiàn)壓力性損傷危險(xiǎn)因素,早期干預(yù),有利于提高壓力性損傷治愈率和降低患者死亡率。
低蛋白飲食是CKD患者的臨床診治手段之一,而CKD患者易因低蛋白飲食出現(xiàn)營(yíng)養(yǎng)不良[14],隨著CKD進(jìn)展,慢性微炎癥狀態(tài)導(dǎo)致蛋白分解代謝增強(qiáng),脂肪合成減少,進(jìn)而蛋白能量消耗(protein energy wasting, PEW)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)增加[15],最終導(dǎo)致死亡風(fēng)險(xiǎn)增加[16]。血清白蛋白是反映營(yíng)養(yǎng)狀況的生化指標(biāo),對(duì)維持血液中膠體滲透壓起重要作用。白蛋白降低導(dǎo)致血漿膠體滲透壓改變,水分進(jìn)入組織液,引起皮膚水腫及缺血缺氧。Holmes等[17]研究顯示白蛋白水平<35 g/L的患者中75%發(fā)生了壓力性損傷,而白蛋白水平較高的患者中壓力性損傷的發(fā)生率為16%。本研究顯示壓力性損傷組病人有較低的血清白蛋白,隨著NRS2002評(píng)分增加,患者血清白蛋白含量逐漸降低,壓力性損傷發(fā)生率及不能下床活動(dòng)比率均逐漸增加。一項(xiàng)橫斷面研究顯示與能下床活動(dòng)的患者相比長(zhǎng)期臥床患者壓力性損傷的發(fā)生率高出75倍[18]。本研究中66.6%的患者長(zhǎng)期臥床,其中壓力性損傷組有82.6%患者不能下床活動(dòng),NRS2002評(píng)分越高,不能下床活動(dòng)比率也越高。由于不能下床活動(dòng)老年患者居多,所以只收集到一部分患者的身高體重,無法將BMI列入計(jì)算并統(tǒng)計(jì)。
進(jìn)一步logistic回歸分析表明,NRS2002評(píng)分的增加是壓力性損傷的獨(dú)立危險(xiǎn)因素,且隨著評(píng)分的增加,患者壓力性損傷發(fā)生的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)亦相應(yīng)增高。通過ROC曲線分析發(fā)現(xiàn),NRS2002評(píng)分對(duì)臨床壓力性損傷的AUC為0.829,特異度和敏感度分別為75.5%和73.1%。當(dāng)各種積極治療措施并不能降低壓力性損傷發(fā)病率時(shí)[19],早期快速識(shí)別高危因素尤為重要。住院的第一周是高度警惕時(shí)期,特別是患者存在營(yíng)養(yǎng)不良的情況下,營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查應(yīng)成為入院常規(guī)評(píng)估,對(duì)于評(píng)分高的患者,醫(yī)護(hù)要提高警惕,積極早期干預(yù),預(yù)防壓力性損傷發(fā)生。本研究的局限性在于樣本量不夠大,并且由于患者住院時(shí)間較短,沒能追蹤患者后續(xù)營(yíng)養(yǎng)支持的情況和NRS2002評(píng)分的動(dòng)態(tài)變化。
綜上所述,本研究發(fā)現(xiàn)高NRS2002評(píng)分是慢性腎臟病患者發(fā)生壓力性損傷的獨(dú)立危險(xiǎn)因素,對(duì)于高評(píng)分患者應(yīng)早期給予干預(yù)治療。
[參考文獻(xiàn)]
[1]? ?Jiang ZM,Chen W,Zhan WH,et al.Parenteral and enteral nutrition application in west,middle and east China:A multi-center investigation for 15098 patients in 13 metropo-litans using nutritional risk screening 2002 tool (abstract)[J].Clinical Nutrition,2007,2:133-134.
[2]? ?Sorensen J,Kondrup J,Prokopowicz J,et al. Eurooops:An international,multicentre study to implement nutritional risk screening and evaluate clinical outcome[J].Clinical Nutrition,2008,27(3):340-349.
[3]? ?Paulina B,MichaC,Sylwia M,et al. Analysis of outcomes of the NRS 2002 in patients hospitalized in Nephrology Wards[J]. Nutrients,2017,9(3):287.
[4]? ?Shahin ESM,Meijers JMM,Schols JMGA,et al.The relation ship between malnutrition parameters and pressure ulcers in hospitals and nursing homes[J].Nutrition,2010, 26(9):886-889.
[5]? ?Stevens PE,Levin A. Kidney disease: Improving global outcomes chronic kidney disease guideline development work group members. Evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease: Synopsis of the kidney disease: Improving global outcomes 2012 clinical practice guideline[J].Ann Intern Med,2013,158(11):825-830.
[6]? ?中華人民共和國衛(wèi)生行業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn):臨床營(yíng)養(yǎng)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)篩查(WS/T427-2013),2013.04.18.
[7]? ?The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel(NPUAP) announces a change in terminologyfrom pressure ulcer to pressure injury and updates the stages of pressure injury[EB/OL].http://www.npuap.org/national.
[8]? ?Kondrup J,Allison SP,Elia M,et al. ESPEN guidelines for nutritional risk screening 2002[J].Clinical Nutrition,2003,22(4):415-421.
[9]? ?Vanderwee K,Clark M,Dealey C,et al. Pressure ulcer prevalence in Europe:A pilot study[J].Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice,2010,13(2):227-235.
[10]? Hisashige A,Ohura T. Cost-effectiveness of nutritional intervention on healing of pressure ulcers[J].Clinical Nutr-ition,2012,31(6):868-874.
[11]? Jiang Q,Li X,Qu X,et al. The incidence,risk factors and characteristics of pressure ulcers in hospitalized patients in China[J].Int J Clin Exp Pathol,2014,7(5):2587-2594.
[12] Scott JR,Gibran NS,Engrav LH,et al. Incidence and characteristics of hospitalized patients with pressure ulcers:State of Washington,1987 to 2000[J].Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery,2006,117(2):630-634.
[13]? Bennett,G. The cost of pressure ulcers in the UK[J]. Age &Agng,2004,33(3):230-235.
[14]? Noce A,Vidiri MF,Marrone G,et al. Is low-protein diet a possible risk factor of malnutrition in chronic kidney disease patients?[J].Cell Death Discov,2016,9(2):16 026.
[15]? Kovesdy CP,Kopple JD,Kalantar ZK. Management of pro- tein-energy wasting in non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease: Reconciling low protein intake with nutritional therapy[J].American Journal of Clinical Nutr- ition,2013,97(6):1163-1177.
[16]? Kanazawa Y,Nakao T,Murai S,et al. Diagnosis and preva- lence of protein-energy wasting and its association with mortality in Japanese hemodialysis patients[J].Nephr- ology(Carlton),2017,22(7):541-547.
[17]? Holmes R,Macchiano K,Jhangiani SS,et al.Nutrition know-how:Combating pressure sores-nutritionally[J]. The Amer ican Journal of Nursing,1987,87(10):1301-1303.
[18]? Patrícia AB,Generoso SDV,Correia MITD. Prevalence of pressure ulcers in hospitals in Brazil and association with nutritional status-A multicenter,cross-sectional study[J]. Nutrition,2013,29(4):646-649.
[19]? Ida,Marie,Bredesen,et al. Patient and organisational variables associated with pressure ulcer prevalence in hospital settings:A multilevel analysis[J].BMJ Open,2015, 5(8):e007 584.
(收稿日期:2021-09-30)