Post-Hip Fracture Pressure Injury With Low Visceral Proteins
An 82-year-old man is admitted from a rehabilitation facility three weeks after a hip fracture with a stage 3 sacral pressure injury and poor oral intake. He has dysphagia after a prior stroke. Admission weight is 58 kg; his usual weight six months ago was 70 kg; height 170 cm. He has 2+ pitting edema to mid-shin and a CRP of 82 mg/L. Serum albumin is 2.6 g/dL and prealbumin 10 mg/dL. He is afebrile, has no diarrhea, and receives furosemide 40 mg daily. The team asks whether his low albumin confirms severe malnutrition and what nutrition regimen to start. A swallow evaluation is pending. He lives alone and his daughter reports he has eaten 'almost nothing' for two weeks.
1. Interpret the albumin and prealbumin values in this patient. Do they establish a diagnosis of severe malnutrition? Explain your reasoning.
Read the worked answer
The low albumin (2.6 g/dL) and prealbumin (10 mg/dL) are abnormal, but they do not establish severe malnutrition by themselves. Both proteins are negative acute-phase reactants: the CRP of 82 mg/L indicates active inflammation, which lowers hepatic synthesis of albumin and prealbumin independently of nutrition status. Albumin is also affected by edema, furosemide, and shifts in body water. Prealbumin has a short half-life but is similarly depressed by inflammation and is not a validated malnutrition marker.
The diagnosis should instead use validated characteristics such as insufficient energy intake, weight loss, loss of muscle mass, loss of subcutaneous fat, fluid accumulation, and reduced handgrip strength. This patient has clear supportive findings: a 17% weight loss in six months (12 kg of 70 kg, severe by ASPEN criteria), two weeks of near-negligible intake, likely muscle loss with bedbound status, and edema that may mask further weight loss. Therefore severe malnutrition can be documented clinically, but not because the visceral proteins are low. The proteins should be interpreted as markers of inflammation and illness severity, not as the primary diagnostic test.
2. Using the data provided, propose an initial energy and protein target for this patient. State the assumptions you make and show the calculation you would document.
Read the worked answer
Because 2+ edema falsely elevates the admission weight, I would base dosing on usual body weight (70 kg) rather than the 58 kg admission weight, while recognizing that this is an estimate. A reasonable energy target for an older, injured patient with a pressure injury is 25-30 kcal/kg of usual body weight: 70 kg x 25-30 kcal/kg = 1,750-2,100 kcal/day. To avoid overfeeding and because he is not ventilator-dependent, I would start at the lower end, about 1,600-1,800 kcal/day, and reassess intake, weight trend, and wound healing.
Protein needs for a stage 3 pressure injury are approximately 1.2-1.5 g/kg. Using usual body weight: 70 kg x 1.2-1.5 g/kg = 84-105 g protein/day. I would document a target of 85-100 g/day provided renal function is acceptable. Fluid should be individualized because of edema and furosemide use; a starting point is about 1 mL/kcal with monitoring of intake, output, sodium, and edema. The plan should state the dosing weight, formula used, and the need to reassess if diuresis changes dry weight.
3. What additional assessment information would you obtain before finalizing the nutrition care plan, and why?
Read the worked answer
I would obtain a swallow evaluation before any oral intake because of post-stroke dysphagia and aspiration risk. I would also complete a 24-hour recall or calorie count, weight history, and functional assessment (handgrip strength, mobility, ability to feed himself) to characterize malnutrition severity and set realistic goals. Fluid status needs objective review: daily weights, intake and output, sodium, renal function, and response to furosemide, because the admission weight may not represent dry weight.
I would assess muscle and fat stores at the temples, clavicles, shoulders, and sacrum, and review the pressure injury for healing progress. Laboratory review should include electrolytes, magnesium, phosphate, renal and hepatic function, glucose, vitamin D, and B12 because older adults with poor intake are at micronutrient risk. A dietitian should also clarify the patient's preferences, decision-making capacity, and the daughter's role, and coordinate with speech-language pathology, nursing, and the wound team. These data determine whether oral supplements, texture-modified diet, or enteral nutrition is appropriate and whether the current energy and protein estimates need adjustment.