Guidance for assessment of the inflammation etiologic criterion for the GLIM diagnosis of malnutrition: A modified Delphi approach
Related Resource(s)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561423003904Date
2024-05Author(s)
Cederholm, Tommy
Jensen, Gordon L.
Ballesteros-Pomar, Maria D.
Blaauw, Renee
Correia, M. Isabel T.D.
Cuerda, Cristina
Evans, David C.
Fukushima, Ryoji
Ochoa Gautier, Juan Bernardo
Gonzalez, M. Cristina
Van Gossum, Andre
Gramlich, Leah
Hartono, Joseph
Heymsfield, Steven B.
Jager-Wittenaar, Harriët
Jayatissa, Renuka
Keller, Heather
Malone, Ainsley
Manzanares, William
McMahon, M. Molly
Mendez, Yolanda
Mogensen, Kris M.
Mori, Naoharu
Muscaritoli, Maurizio
Nogales, Guillermo Contreras
Nyulasi, Ibolya
Phillips, Wendy
Pirlich, Matthias
Pisprasert, Veeradej
Rothenberg, Elisabet
de van der Schueren, Marian
Shi, Han Ping
Steiber, Alison
Winkler, Marion F.
Barazzoni, Rocco
Compher, Charlene
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Background & aims: 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 in support of the
etiologic criterion for inflammation.
Methods: A GLIM-constituted working group with 36 participants developed consensus-based guidance
through a modified-Delphi review. A multi-round 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 (mg/dL or mg/L) for the
clinical laboratory that is being used.
Conclusion: Confirmation of inflammation should be guided by clinical judgement based upon underlying diagnosis or condition, clinical signs, or CRP.
Collections
- Artículos científicos [933]