What is the additive value of nutritional deficiency to VA-FI in the risk assessment for heart failure patients?

Kim SE, Azarian M, Naik AD, Park C, Horstman MJ, Virani SS, Intrator O, Amos CI, Orkaby A, Razjouyan J. What is the additive value of nutritional deficiency to VA-FI in the risk assessment for heart failure patients? The Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging. 2024 Jul 1; 28(7):100253.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• CDA 21-143 – Hospital GamePlan4Care: A Web-Based Delivery System for Dementia Caregiver Support

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of adding the Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) to the U.S. Veterans Health Administration frailty index (VA-FI) for the prediction of time-to-death and other clinical outcomes in Veterans hospitalized with Heart Failure. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of veterans hospitalized for heart failure (HF) from October 2015 to October 2018. Veterans = 50 years with albumin and lymphocyte counts, needed to calculate the PNI, in the year prior to hospitalization were included. We defined malnutrition as PNI = 43.6, based on the Youden index. VA-FI was calculated from the year prior to the hospitalization and identified three groups: robust ( = 0.1), prefrail (0.1-0.2), and frail ( > 0.2). Malnutrition was added to the VA-FI (VA-FI-Nutrition) as a 32 deficit with the total number of deficits divided by 32. Frailty levels used the same cut-offs as the VA-FI. We compared categories based on VA-FI to those based on VA-FI-Nutrition and estimated the hazard ratio (HR) for post-discharge all-cause mortality over the study period as the primary outcome and other adverse events as secondary outcomes among patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction in each VA-FI and VA-FI-Nutrition frailty groups. RESULTS: We identified 37,601 Veterans hospitalized for HF (mean age: 73.4 ± 10.3 years, BMI: 31.3 ± 7.4 kg/m). In general, VA-FI-Nutrition reclassified 1959 (18.6%) Veterans to a higher frailty level. The VA-FI identified 1,880 (5%) as robust, 8,644 (23%) as prefrail, and 27,077 (72%) as frail. The VA-FI-Nutrition reclassified 382 (20.3%) from robust to prefrail and 1577 (18.2%) from prefrail to frail creating the modified-prefrail and modified-frail categories based on the VA-FI-Nutrition. We observed shorter time-to-death among Veterans reclassified to a higher frailty status vs. those who remained in their original group (Median of 2.8 years (IQR:0.5,6.8) in modified-prefrail vs. 6.3 (IQR:1.8,6.8) years in robust, and 2.2 (IQR:0.7,5.7) years in modified-frail vs. 3.9 (IQR:1.4,6.8) years in prefrail). The adjusted HR in the reclassified groups was also significantly higher in the VA-FI-Nutrition frailty categories with a 38% increase in overall all-cause mortality among modified-prefrail and a 50% increase among modified-frails. Similar trends of increasing adverse events were also observed among reclassified groups for other clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Adding PNI to VA-FI provides a more accurate and comprehensive assessment among Veterans hospitalized for HF. Clinicians should consider adding a specific nutrition algorithm to automated frailty tools to improve the validity of risk prediction in patients hospitalized with HF.