In many surgical patients, malnutrition is correlated with poor clinical outcomes.1–3 However, the prevalence of malnutrition in geriatric trauma patients is unknown, and its relationship to clinical outcomes is poorly defined. In addition, there are no widely accepted screening tools to identify malnourished geriatric trauma patients or the impact on clinical outcomes. Current management guidelines from American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the American College of Surgeons do not recommend specific nutritional screening strategies, assessment strategies, or interventions to guide clinical care.4–6

The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) was first described in 2005 as a tool to identify medical patients at risk of malnutrition-related morbidity and mortality.7 This score uses albumin and ideal body weight (IBW), has been prospectively validated in hospitalized geriatric patients, and correlates with frailty and sarcopenia.8–11 The populations in which this scoring index has been validated have since been expanded, and the GNRI has been shown to be predictive of complications in a large variety of surgical procedures, including orthopedic, surgical oncology, colorectal, and general surgery, but it has been applied to trauma patients in a limited number of studies.9,12–16

In this study, we aimed to define the prevalence and severity of malnutrition in geriatric trauma patients using GNRI and to evaluate the association between GNRI and clinical outcomes. We hypothesized that the GNRI can be used to screen geriatric trauma patients and that a low GNRI (high risk of malnutrition) would be associated with worse clinical outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After approval by institutional and hospital review boards, a retrospective cohort study was conducted of trauma patients 65 years or older admitted to an urban level 1 trauma center from January 1 to December 31, 2019. This study follows the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines for reporting observational studies, and a complete checklist has been uploaded as Supplemental Digital Content (Supplementary Data 1, https://links.lww.com/TA/C410).17 Demographic, injury, and outcome data were obtained from the institution's trauma registry and supplemented with manual review of the electronic medical record. Only patients who had an albumin level drawn within 24 hours of hospital arrival were included. This stipulation was necessary for calculation of the GNRI.

Outcome Measures

Each patient's GNRI score was determined using the equation described previously by Bouillanne et al.7 The IBW was calculated according to the Lorentz formula, and the GNRI score was calculated with admission albumin level and ratio of actual body weight to IBW.7

Lorentz formula: IBW male = (height − 100 − ((height − 150)/4)

IBW female = (height − 100 − ((height − 150)/2)

GNRI score: GNRI = [1.489 × albumin (g/L)] + [41.7 × (weight/IBW)]

Groups were defined as major risk (GNRI <82), moderate risk (GNRI 82–91), low risk (GNRI 92–98), and no risk (GNRI >98) based on prior studies.9,12,14–16 The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, sepsis, pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, 30-day readmission after hospital discharge, unplanned ICU admission, and sacral decubitus ulcer, which were obtained from the prospectively maintained trauma database, where these outcome measures are recorded according to the standardized definitions by the National Trauma Data Bank.18

Statistical Analysis

Patients within each GNRI risk category were compared. Median values with interquartile ranges were used to describe continuous data, and discrete data were reported as frequency and percentage. χ2 and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare categorical and continuous demographic data and outcomes, respectively, with post hoc tests and Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. p Values <0.05 were considered significant. Multivariable log-binomial regression models were used to assess the relationship between GNRI categories and outcomes of interest. All associations were reported as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Covariates known or suspected to be confounders between GNRI category and outcome were chosen a priori: age, Injury Severity Score (ISS), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). All data analyses were completed using R version 3.53 (R Core Team, 2013, R: A language and environment for statistical computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).

RESULTS Patient and Injury Characteristics

Five hundred thirteen geriatric trauma patients admitted to our trauma center in 2019 who had an albumin level drawn within 24 hours of admission were identified for analysis. Median age was 78 (71–86) years. Patients had a median ISS of 10 (6–17), and 99% were injured by a blunt mechanism. The majority of patients were hospitalized after falls (82%). Based on GNRI scores, 24 patients (4.7%) were identified as major risk, 66 (12.9%) as moderate risk, 72 (14%) as low risk, and 351 (68.4%) as no risk (Table 1). Injury Severity Score and CCI were similar between all groups.

TABLE 1 - Patient Demographics by Nutrition-Related Risk Groups Major
(n = 24) Moderate
(n = 66) Low
(n = 72) No
(n = 351) p Age 84 (77–89) 83 (73–88) 84 (73–90) 76 (71–84) <0.001 84 (77–89) 76 (71–84) 0.02* 83 (73–88) 76 (71–84) 0.005** 84 (73–90) 76 (71–84) 0.004† Female sex 15 (63%) 40 (61%) 38 (53%) 149 (43%) 0.011 Blunt injury 24 (100%) 66 (100%) 72 (100%) 349 (99%) 0.82 Fall 23 (96%) 62 (94%) 61 (85%) 275 (78%) 0.45 ISS 10 (9–17) 10 (9–17) 14 (9–17) 9 (5–17) 0.09 CCI 5 (4–7) 6 (5–7) 5 (4–6) 5 (4–7) 0.06 Admission albumin 2.2 (1.8–2.7) 2.9 (2.5–3.1) 3.0 (2.7–3.4) 3.4 (3.1–3.7) <0.001 2.2 (1.8–2.7) 3.4 (3.1–3.7) <0.001* 2.9 (2.5–3.1) 3.4 (3.1–3.7) <0.001** 3.0 (2.7–3.4) 3.4 (3.1–3.7) <0.001† 2.2 (1.8–2.7) 3.0 (2.7–3.4) <0.001‡ Body mass index 18 (16–20) 21 (19–23) 23 (20–25) 27 (25–31) <0.001 18 (16–20) 27 (25–31) <0.001* 21 (19–23) 27 (25–31) <0.001** 23 (20–25) 27 (25–31) <0.001† 18 (16–20) 23 (20–25) 0.02‡ Race 0.08  White 10 (42%) 34 (52%) 44 (61%) 197 (56%)  Black 6 (25%) 7 (11%) 8 (11%) 64 (18%)  Hispanic 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (1%)  Other 6 (25%) 25 (38%) 17 (24%) 81 (23%)

Categorical data are presented as n (%), and continuous data as median (interquartile range).

Post hoc tests of significance, p < 0.05.

Post hoc tests:

*Major risk compared with no risk.

**Moderate risk compared with no risk.

†Low risk compared with no risk.

‡Major risk compared with low risk.

Comparison of Nutritional Risk Groups

Body mass index and albumin levels increased GNRI score, with patients in the major risk category having the lowest body mass index and albumin level, consistent with the definition of the GNRI score. In addition, patients in the major risk category were older with a higher percentage of female patients than the no risk category (p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in racial distribution between GNRI categories. In analysis of our primary outcome on bivariate analysis, the major risk group had higher rates of death when compared with the no risk group (Table 2). On multivariable logistic regression after adjusting for ISS, age, and CCI, all groups with malnutrition had increased odds of death compared with the no risk group (Table 3).

TABLE 2 - Patient Outcomes by Nutrition-Related Risk Groups Major
(n = 24) Moderate
(n = 66) Low
(n = 72) No
(n = 351) p Pneumonia 2 (8%) 0 (0%) 1 (1%) 3 (1%) 0.008 Sepsis 3 (13%) 0 (0%) 1 (1%) 5 (1%) <0.001 Death 6 (25%) 8 (12%) 7 (10%) 16 (5%) <0.001 6 (25%) 16 (5%) 0.001* ARDS 1 (4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) <0.001 ICU LOS 1 (0–6) 0 (0–2) 1 (0–3) 0 (0–2) 0.39 Hospital LOS 14 (6–25) 7 (3–11) 6 (3–12) 5 (3–10) 0.002 14 (6–25) 5 (3–10) 0.01* 30-d Readmission 2 (8%) 9 (14%) 13 (18%) 41 (12%) 0.45 Unplanned ICU admission 3 (13%) 5 (8%) 3 (4%) 11 (3%) 0.08 Sacral decubitus ulcer 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (0%) 0.93 Nonhome discharge 19 (79%) 39 (59%) 46 (64%) 198 (56%) 0.13

Categorical data presented as n (%), and continuous data as median (interquartile range).

Post hoc tests of significance, p < 0.05.

Post hoc tests:

*Major risk compared with no risk.

ARDS, acute respiratory distress syndrome.

TABLE 3 - Multivariable Analysis, Mortality Odds Ratio 95% Confidence Interval Major (n = 24) 7.4 2.3–22.0 Moderate (n = 66) 2.9 1.1–7.3 Low (n = 72) 2.3 0.8–5.9

Patients who died were analyzed as having a 30-day hospital LOS. Overall, patients in the major risk group had higher rates of infectious complications including pneumonia and sepsis when compared with the no risk group (Table 2). In addition, the major risk group had longer hospital LOS and was less likely to be discharged home. There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day readmission, unplanned ICU admission, or sacral decubitus ulcers between the groups.

DISCUSSION

The relationship between malnutrition and outcomes in geriatric trauma patients is poorly defined, and there is currently no widely accepted screening tool to identify and predict the malnourished at highest risk for poor outcomes. After controlling for age, ISS, and CCI, geriatric trauma patients with major nutritional risk by GNRI score had higher mortality, more infectious complications, and longer hospital LOS and were less likely to be discharged home.

Overall, geriatric patients are at elevated risk of malnutrition because of the prevalence of disease, disability, polypharmacy, inability to chew food adequately, and dysphagia.19 In the present study, 32% of patients had malnutrition based on GNRI score. Because of comorbidities and age-related physiologic compromise, geriatric patients are also at elevated risk for clinical manifestations of malnutrition after undergoing surgery, including sarcopenia and muscle atrophy.20,21 Malnutrition can contribute to muscle weakness, frailty, reduced physical function, and resultant decreased quality of life postoperatively.21 In addition, malnutrition can impair immune function and increase respiratory dysfunction.22,23 Because of these impairments, associations have been repeatedly demonstrated between malnutrition and adverse clinical outcomes in geriatric patients.3,19,22,24–26

Traumatic injury causes a catecholamine-mediated stress response that has been previously described in relationship to hemorrhagic shock and endotheliopathy.27,28 The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism guidelines recommend reducing factors that exacerbate stress-related catabolism; however, this is challenging to limit in injured patients, as traumatic injury inherently causes this exaggerated stress response.29 This additional catabolic response can directly result in worsening of existing caloric deficits and nutrition-related pathology.19,20 Overall, more severe injuries lead to a more severe trauma-related inflammatory response, placing multiple injury patients at an elevated risk of postoperative complications secondary to nutritional status.30 Thus, geriatric multiple injury patients represent an especially high-risk group with multiple risk factors for nutrition-related complications.

While numerous prior studies have demonstrated this link between nutrition and poor clinical outcomes, the optimal method to diagnose malnutrition remains unclear. The GNRI has been prospectively validated in multiple populations, including patients undergoing abdominal surgery.8–11,13,31 This index was developed specifically as a predictive tool for nutrition-related complications rather than as a diagnostic tool for malnutrition.7,32 With only three objective parameters required for calculation, the score is easy to calculate in an acute setting and has no subjective measures that require patient or caregiver participation, thus eliminating the bias caused by reporting.11 Our study aligns with this prior research and suggests that nutrition may be a contributing risk factor to poor outcomes in this vulnerable cohort.12,14–16

Prior studies using GNRI in trauma patients have demonstrated an association between GNRI and adverse clinical outcomes in geriatric trauma patients. Su et al.33 found an independent association between GNRI and mortality in geriatric patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Other studies corroborated this association between malnutrition and mortality as well as found an association between GNRI, prolonged hospital LOS, and poor functional outcomes.12,14,34 With this study, we have identified a population that can be identified early in the hospital course as high risk for poor clinical outcomes. Accordingly, this population may benefit from early interventions of nutrition as a modifiable risk factor. The GNRI could be used to stratify patients at risk for poor outcomes on admission and thus aid multidisciplinary teams in determining which patients will benefit from early aggressive nutritional supplementation.35–37

Limitations

The primary limitation of this study is its retrospective design that did not allow for assessment of frailty in this cohort. Accordingly, we were not able to assess if malnutrition acted as the causative factor in poor outcomes or if it acted as a surrogate for overall frailty. Second, a number of patients were excluded because of not having an albumin level drawn within 24 hours of admission, which prohibited calculation of GNRI and could have introduced selection bias. This limited our ability to draw conclusions regarding less common outcomes on multivariable analysis. This small study prompts further studies in which albumin is routinely drawn, creating a larger population and thus broadening the heterogeneity of included patients and making these conclusions more generalizable. A prospective study is needed for more complete evaluation of a patient's nutritional status, accounting for recent weight loss, reduced muscle mass, and functional status at home—variables that are difficult to capture retrospectively. Furthermore, the potential benefit of early nutritional intervention was not addressed in our study, and more work is needed to assess if postinjury nutritional interventions can mitigate these poor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Malnutrition as determined by GNRI risk is associated with increased mortality and infectious complications in geriatric trauma patients, an association that remains after controlling for possible confounders including age, ISS, and CCI. In addition, routine measurement of albumin in elderly geriatric patients should be considered to calculate GNRI, which is feasible to use in clinical practice. Further studies should target interventional strategies for those at highest risk based on GNRI.

AUTHORSHIP

All authors have been actively involved in the drafting and critical revision of the manuscript and have approved the final version to be published.

DISCLOSURE

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

REFERENCES 1. Wade CE, Kozar RA, Dyer CB, Bulger EM, Mourtzakis M, Heyland DK. Evaluation of nutrition deficits in adult and elderly trauma patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2015;39(4):449–455. 2. Müller FS, Meyer OW, Chocano-Bedoya P, Schietzel S, Gagesch M, Freystaetter G, et al. Impaired nutritional status in geriatric trauma patients. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2017;71(5):602–606. 3. Gentile S, Lacroix O, Durand AC, Cretel E, Alazia M, Sambuc R, et al. Malnutrition: a highly predictive risk factor of short-term mortality in elderly presenting to the emergency department. J Nutr Health Aging. 2013;17(4):290–294. 4. Mueller C, Compher C, Ellen DM. A.S.P.E.N. clinical guidelines: nutrition screening, assessment, and intervention in adults. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2011;35(1):16–24. 5. Weimann A, Braga M, Carli F, Higashiguchi T, Hübner M, Klek S, et al. ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition in surgery. Clin Nutr. 2021;40:4745–4761. 6. Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, Gonzalez MC, Fukushima R, Higashiguchi T, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019;43(1):32–40. 7. Bouillanne O, Morineau G, Dupont C, Coulombel I, Vincent JP, Nicolis I, et al. Geriatric nutritional risk index: a new index for evaluating at-risk elderly medical patients. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005;82(4):777–783. 8. Hanada M, Yamauchi K, Miyazaki S, Hirasawa J, Oyama Y, Yanagita Y, et al. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index, a predictive assessment tool, for postoperative complications after abdominal surgery: a prospective multicenter cohort study. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2019;19(9):924–929. 9. Jia Z, El Moheb M, Nordestgaard A, Lee JM, Meier K, Kongkaewpaisan N, et al. The geriatric nutritional risk index is a powerful predictor of adverse outcome in the elderly emergency surgery patient. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020;89(2):397–404. 10. Zhao Y, Lin T, Hou L, Zhang M, Peng X, Xie D, et al. Association Between Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index and Frailty in Older Hospitalized Patients. Clin Interv Aging. 2021;16:1241–1249. 11. Rasheedy D, El-Kawaly WH. The accuracy of the geriatric nutritional risk index in detecting frailty and sarcopenia in hospitalized older adults. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2020;32(12):2469–2477. 12. Huang SW, Yin SM, Hsieh CH. Association of a low geriatric nutritional risk index with higher adverse outcome in the elderly patients with fall injuries: analysis of a propensity score-matched population. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021;14:1353–1361. 13. Yeh CH, Wu SC, Chou SE, Su WT, Tsai CH, Li C, et al. Geriatric nutritional risk index as a tool to evaluate impact of malnutrition risk on mortality in adult patients with polytrauma. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:9233. 14. Liu HT, Wu SC, Tsai CH, Li C, Chou SE, Su WT, et al. Association between geriatric nutritional risk index and mortality in older trauma patients in the intensive care unit. Nutrients. 2020;12(12):3861. 15. Liu YW, Tsai CH, Chou SE, Su WT, Li C, Hsu SY, et al. Geriatric nutritional risk index in screening malnutrition among young adult and elderly trauma patients. Formos J Surg. 2021;54(5):183. 16. Su WT, Wu SC, Huang CY, Chou SE, Tsai CH, Li C, et al. Geriatric nutritional risk index as a screening tool to identify patients with malnutrition at a high risk of in-hospital mortality among elderly patients with femoral fractures-a retrospective study in a level I trauma center. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(23):8920. 17. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):344–349. 18. Trauma CON. National Trauma Data Bank Data Dictionary. 2020;(January). Available at: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/trauma/tqp/center-programs/ntdb/ntds. Accessed December 20, 2021. 19. Dudrick SJ. Nutrition management of geriatric surgical patients. Surg Clin North Am. 2011;91(4):877–896. 20. Zappulla E, Russo V, Gullotta I, Patanè G, Trovato S, Lucifora B, et al. Total parenteral nutrition in major surgery: role in geriatric age. BMC Geriatr. 2009;9(Suppl 1):1–2. 21. Byrnes A, Banks M, Mudge A, Young A, Bauer J. Enhanced recovery after surgery as an auditing framework for identifying improvements to perioperative nutrition care of older surgical patients. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018;72(6):913–916. 22. Potter J, Klipstein K, Reilly JJ, Roberts M. The Nutritional status and clinical course of acute admissions to a geriatric unit. Age Ageing. 1995;24:131–136. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/ageing/article/24/2/131/35696. Accessed November 15, 2021. 23. Windsor JA, Hill GL. Risk factors for postoperative pneumonia. The importance of protein depletion. Ann Surg. 1988;208(2):209–214. 24. Comette P, D’hoore W, Malhomme B, Van Pee D, Meert P, Swine C. Differential risk factors for early and later hospital readmission of older patients. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2005;17(4):322–328. 25. Friedmann JM, Jensen GL, Smiciklas-Wright H, McCamish MA. Predicting early nonelective hospital readmission in nutritionally compromised older adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997;65(6):1714–1720. 26. Chima CS, Barco K, Dewitt ML, Maeda M, Teran JC, Mullen KD. Relationship of nutritional status to length of stay, hospital costs, and discharge status of patients hospitalized in the medicine service. J Am Diet Assoc. 1997;97(9):975–978. 27. Johansson PI, Stensballe J, Ostrowski SR. Shock induced endotheliopathy (SHINE) in acute critical illness — a unifying pathophysiologic mechanism. Crit Care. 2017;21(1):25. 28. Rahbar E, Cardenas JC, Baimukanova G, Usadi B, Bruhn R, Pati S, et al. Endothelial glycocalyx shedding and vascular permeability in severely injured trauma patients. J Transl Med. 2015;13:117. 29. Weimann A, Braga M, Carli F, Higashiguchi T, Hübner M, Klek S, et al. ESPEN guideline: Clinical nutrition in surgery. Clin Nutr. 2017;36(3):623–650. 30. Dijkink S, Meier K, Krijnen P, Yeh DD, Velmahos GC, Arbous MS, et al. The malnutrition in polytrauma patients (MaPP) study: research protocol. Nutr Health. 2019;25(4):291–301. 31. Luo H, Yang H, Huang B, Yuan D, Zhu J, Zhao J. Geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) independently predicts amputation inchronic criticallimb ischemia (CLI). PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0152111. 32. Abd Aziz NAS, Mohd Fahmi Teng NI, Kamarul Zaman M. Geriatric Nutrition Risk Index is comparable to the mini nutritional assessment for assessing nutritional status in elderly hospitalized patients. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2019;29:77–85. 33. Su WT, Tsai CH, Huang CY, Chou SE, Li C, Hsu SY, et al. Geriatric nutritional risk index as a prognostic factor for mortality in elderly patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injuries. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021;14:2465–2474. 34. Inoue T, Misu S, Tanaka T, Kakehi T, Ono R. Acute phase nutritional screening tool associated with functional outcomes of hip fracture patients: a longitudinal study to compare MNA-SF, MUST, NRS-2002 and GNRI. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(1):220–226. 35. Reinders I, Volkert D, de Groot LCPGM, Beck AM, Feldblum I, Jobse I, et al. Effectiveness of nutritional interventions in older adults at risk of malnutrition across different health care settings: pooled analyses of individual participant data from nine randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(4):1797–1806. 36. Ridley EJ, Davies AR, Parke R, Bailey M, McArthur C, Gillanders L, et al. Supplemental parenteral nutrition versus usual care in critically ill adults: a pilot randomized controlled study. Crit Care. 2018;22(1):12. 37. Wischmeyer PE, Hasselmann M, Kummerlen C, Kozar R, Kutsogiannis DJ, Karvellas CJ, et al. A randomized trial of supplemental parenteral nutrition in underweight and overweight critically ill patients: the TOP-UP pilot trial. Crit Care. 2017;21(1):142.