Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Clinical nutrition, enteral and parenteral nutrition

Anamnestic weight loss—do patients remember correctly?

Abstract

Background/objective:

Information on weight loss is used in screening and assessment tools. It is essential that the data are correct. Anamnestic data of weight changes were compared with records for hospitalized patients and outpatients.

Subjects/methods:

For hospitalized patients, anamnestic and recorded weight data were obtained. For outpatients, data of weight changes since last visit were obtained.

Results:

Of 34 hospitalized patients, 21 stated change of weight (15 lost, 6 gained). Weight loss in 9 and weight gain in 12 patients were recorded. Ten patients stated no change of weight. Weight loss in 4 and weight gain in 3 patients were recorded. Of 15 patients who stated weight loss, it was correct for 9 patients. Six of 21 patients stated weight changes opposite the records. Of 43 patients, 14 stated weight changes before admission; only 9 could indicate the time span. Ten patients stated ‘Do not know’ to the question of weight changes. For 156 outpatients, 86 stated change of weight (39 lost, 47 gained). Weight loss in 42 and weight gain in 47 patients were recorded. Fifty-eight patients stated no change of weight. Weight loss in 26 and weight gain in 29 patients were recorded. Of 38 patients who stated weight loss, it was correct for 31. Seventeen of 85 patients stated weight changes opposite the records.

Conclusions:

Recollection of weight changes is poor for a large percentage of patients. In patients who stated weight loss it was only correct for 75%, and for patients who stated unchanged weight 25% have lost more than 1 kg. Thus, incorrect weight loss data can cause over- and underestimation of nutritional risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kondrup J, Allison SP, Elia M, Vellas B, Plaut M . ESPEN guidelines for nutrition screening 2002. Clin Nutr 2003; 22: 415–421.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Marton KI, Sox HC, Krupp JR . Involuntary weight loss: diagnostic and prognostic significance. Ann Intern Med 1981; 95: 568–574.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Baker JP, Detsky AS, Wesson DE, Wolman SL, Steward S, Whitewell J et al. Nutritional assessment. A comparison of clinical judgment and objective measurements. N Engl J Med 1982; 16: 969–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Detsky AS, Baker JP, Mendelson RA, Wolman SL, Wesson DE, Jeejeebhoy KN . Evaluating the accuracy of nutritional assessment techniques applied to hospitalized patients: Methodology and comparisons. J Parenter Enterel Nutr 1984; 8: 153–159.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J Eriksen.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Contributors: Both authors contributed substantially to the study. JE wrote the manuscript, which was read and approved by SBS.

Results of the study were presented as a poster at the ESPEN congress, Rome, September 2008.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eriksen, J., Sneftrup, S. Anamnestic weight loss—do patients remember correctly?. Eur J Clin Nutr 67, 607–609 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2013.65

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2013.65

Keywords

Search

Quick links