Comparison of Subjective Global Assessment with Objective Parameters in Patients Maintaining Hemodialysis Treatment: A Cross-Sectional Study

Aim: There are two kinds of nutritional status assessment for patients which maintain hemodialysis treatment. One of them is the objective and the other is the subjective scoring system. In this study, hypoalbuminemia which is suggested as a diagnostic marker for malnutrition by the International Society of Renal Nutrition and Metabolism (ISRNM) is compared with sga scoring system for the patients biodemographic features. Material and Method: This cross-sectional study was conducted with the datas of 191 patients maintaining hemodialysis treatment in four public hemodialysis centers located in Kars and Ardahan. Patients seperated into two groups according to SGA score and serum albumin levels. The group which dependent variable is SGA is further divided into two according to their nutritional Status which is good and not good (SGA score: 1–14 and 15–49) and the other group which dependent variable is serum albümin is further divided into two as well (serum albümin levels: lower than 3.8 g/dl and higher than 3.8 g/dl). Patients age, duration of hemodialysis, vascular access, diabetes mellitus presence are considered as the independent variables and are compared with dependent variables. Results: The analysis results of 191 patients datas revealed that, the percentage of patients whose nutritional Status is not fine is 39%, serum albümin levels lower than 3.8 g/dl is 51.3%, womens percentage is 40.8, age 65 and older is 51.3%, duration of hemodialysis gelonger than 5 years is 40.8%, barody mass Index below 23 is 43.5%, Kt/V ratio lower than the target value is 22.5%. There is no significant statistical difference between SGA score and independent variables. The objective parameter serum albümin levels and patients gender, Kt/V ratio, anemisi, serum CRP, vascular access have significant statistical differences. Conclusion: In hemodialysis patients, objective parameters are more effective markers than SGA in evaluating nutritional status