Malnutrition could profoundly affect older adults’ oral health and quality of life, whereas oral health might, in turn, impact dietary intake and nutritional status. The present study aimed to investigate the association between general and oral health and nutritional status among older adults attending nutrition clinics at two main medical centers in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A cross-section study was carried out among adult patients (≥60 years) who attended a geriatric clinic or nutrition clinic at King Khalid University Hospital or King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh. A validated clinician’s Mini Nutritional Assessment Short-Form (MNA-SF), Oral Health Impact Profile-5 (OHIP-5), and 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) were collected from each participant. A total of 261 participants with a mean age of 72.14 (±8.97) years were recruited. Diabetes (71%) and hypertension (80%) were present in the majority of patients. The overall MNA-SF score was (10 ± 3). Based on the categorization of the MNA-SF score, 65.9% were classified as malnourished or at risk of malnutrition. Participants with OHIP-5 scores higher than the median (>5) were more likely to be malnourished than those with scores at or lower than 5 (p < 0). The adjusted odd ratio for the MNA-SF score categories indicated that for a one-unit increase in the total SF-36 score, the odds of the malnourished category are 0.94 times less than the risk of malnutrition and normal nutritional status, with OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.94–0.95). Malnutrition or being at risk of malnutrition is likely associated with poor general and oral health. Healthcare providers need to incorporate dietitians into care plans to promote the nutritional health of older adults.

Background/Objectives: Nutritional-risk screening at admission is mandatory in many hospitals but is rarely audited. We audited routine Nutritional-Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) records entered by nurses with mandatory training and credentialed access in hospitalized adults with diabetes. Methods: Retrospective, records-based audit of all eligible admissions (2020–2025) at a Saudi tertiary center. Routine items were extracted verbatim, and dietitians re-scored each admission from the same record using a common written procedure. Results: Of 650 admissions assessed, 131 were excluded (46 with no form opened; 85 with incomplete clinical data). Of 519 analyzed forms, 446 (85.9%) carried zero on every item and 22 (4.2%) contained any substantive item; of 73 non-zero totals, 41 comprised the age item alone and 11 could not be derived from their items. Among 83 admissions in which a charted body-mass index below 20.5 kg/m² made the full screen mandatory, 79 (95.2%) had no substantive item. Any entry was present in 70.8% of patients aged ≥70 years versus 5.9% of younger patients, although indications for the full screen were less frequent in older patients. Re-scoring classified 124 admissions (23.9%, 95% CI 20.4–27.7) at NRS-2002-defined risk versus one routinely; 123 (99.2%) were unrecognized. Scoring diabetes itself as disease severity 1 left this unchanged; an extreme lower-bound rule gave 57 (11.0%), none recognized. Conclusions: Routine documentation was strongly suggestive of incomplete NRS-2002 implementation despite mandatory training. Its causes cannot be determined from the records; workflow-embedded completion, automated referral, and routine audit warrant prospective evaluation.