Original Title: Análisis del ángulo de fase por bioimpedancia como pronóstico en pacientes con necesidades de cuidados paliativos en enfermedades crónicas no oncológicas

Authors' objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and efficiency of PhA analysis by BIA as a prognostic factor in patients requiring PC due to NOCD, along with the ethical, legal, organizational, social, and environmental aspects of this health technology.

Authors' results and conclusions: RESULTS: The SR yielded 859 study references. After applying all inclusion and exclusion criteria, no references were selected. Due to the absence of evidence meeting the initial criteria, a manual search was performed, resulting in the inclusion of one case–control study with acceptable methodological quality. The only included study reported that PhA was the only value independently associated with mortality in elderly patients with multimorbidity, and ROC curve analysis confirmed its good discriminative capacity. Regarding safety, the included study did not evaluate adverse events as an endpoint; therefore, the safety of the technology could not be assessed in this report. No studies related to cost‑effectiveness were found. CONCLUSIONS: • The results obtained did not provide sufficient information to establish a clear recommendation for or against this technique. • The cost‑effectiveness of using PhA measured by BIA as a prognostic value for the need for PC in patients with NOCD, compared with the current prognostic tools of choice for this indication, is unknown

Authors' methods: A systematic review (SR) of the available scientific literature was conducted on the effectiveness, safety, and efficiency of PhA analysis by BIA as a prognostic factor in patients requiring PC due to NOCD. The inclusion of studies followed the PICO criteria: • Population: patients requiring PC due to NOCD. • Intervention: PhA analysis by BIA as a prognostic factor. • Comparator: other indices and scales with general or disease‑specific prognostic value. • Outcomes: diagnostic effectiveness, bioelectrical parameters, mortality, mobility/immobility, functional decline, hospital admissions, exacerbations, falls, malnutrition, mass, strength, adverse events or complications, and outcomes related to economic, ethical, legal, organizational, social, and environmental aspects. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the MINORS tool. A qualitative synthesis of results was performed.

Project Status: Completed

Year Published: 2026

URL for published report: https://redets.sanidad.gob.es/productos/buscarProductos.do?metodo=detalle&id=1472

English language abstract: An English language summary is available

Publication Type: Not Assigned

Country: Spain

Organisation Name: Agencia de Evaluacion de Tecnologias Sanitarias

Contact Address: Instituto de Salud "Carlos III", Calle Sinesio Delgado 6, Pabellon 4, 28029 Madrid, Spain. Tel: +34 9 1 822 2005; Fax: +34 9 1 387 7841;

Contact Name: Esther E. García Carpintero

Contact Email: eegarcia@isciii.es

Copyright: Agencia de Evaluacion de Tecnologias Sanitarias