Frailty or sarcopenia: which is a better indicator of mortality risk in older adults?

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Aline Fernanda de Souza, Paula Camila Ramírez, Dayane Capra de Oliveira, Roberta de Oliveira Máximo, Mariane Marques Luiz, Maicon Luis Bicigo Delinocente, Maria Claudia Bernardes Spexoto, Andrew Steptoe, Cesar De Oliveira, Tiago da Silva Alexandre
{"title":"Frailty or sarcopenia: which is a better indicator of mortality risk in older adults?","authors":"Aline Fernanda de Souza, Paula Camila Ramírez, Dayane Capra de Oliveira, Roberta de Oliveira Máximo, Mariane Marques Luiz, Maicon Luis Bicigo Delinocente, Maria Claudia Bernardes Spexoto, Andrew Steptoe, Cesar De Oliveira, Tiago da Silva Alexandre","doi":"10.1136/jech-2024-222678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the different conditions, frailty and sarcopenia overlap regarding their common link: the assessment of walking speed and muscle strength. This study aimed to compare the frailty phenotype to the sarcopenia using different cut-off points for low grip strength to determine which better identifies mortality risk over a 14-year follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>4597 participants in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Frailty was measured using the Fried phenotype. Sarcopenia (European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2) was defined using different cut-off points for low grip strength (<36, <32, <30, <27 and <26 kg for men and <23, <21, <20 and <16 kg for women), low skeletal muscle mass index (<9.36 kg/m² for men and<6.73 kg/m² for women) and slowness (gait speed: ≤0.8 m/s). Cox models were run and adjusted for sociodemographic, behavioural and clinical factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When the coexistence of frailty and sarcopenia is considered, only the cut-off points <36 kg for men and <23 kg for women to define low grip strength identified the risk of mortality among individuals classified as having probable sarcopenia (HR=1.17, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.34), sarcopenia (HR=1.31, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.60) and severe sarcopenia (HR=1.62, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.96). In this situation, frailty identified the mortality risk (HR=1.49, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.81), whereas pre-frailty did not. Sarcopenia using other cut-off points for defining low grip strength did not identify mortality risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Sarcopenia using <36 kg for men and <23 kg for women as cut-off points seems to be better than the frailty phenotype for identifying the risk of mortality in older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":54839,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2024-222678","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite the different conditions, frailty and sarcopenia overlap regarding their common link: the assessment of walking speed and muscle strength. This study aimed to compare the frailty phenotype to the sarcopenia using different cut-off points for low grip strength to determine which better identifies mortality risk over a 14-year follow-up period.

Methods: 4597 participants in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Frailty was measured using the Fried phenotype. Sarcopenia (European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2) was defined using different cut-off points for low grip strength (<36, <32, <30, <27 and <26 kg for men and <23, <21, <20 and <16 kg for women), low skeletal muscle mass index (<9.36 kg/m² for men and<6.73 kg/m² for women) and slowness (gait speed: ≤0.8 m/s). Cox models were run and adjusted for sociodemographic, behavioural and clinical factors.

Results: When the coexistence of frailty and sarcopenia is considered, only the cut-off points <36 kg for men and <23 kg for women to define low grip strength identified the risk of mortality among individuals classified as having probable sarcopenia (HR=1.17, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.34), sarcopenia (HR=1.31, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.60) and severe sarcopenia (HR=1.62, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.96). In this situation, frailty identified the mortality risk (HR=1.49, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.81), whereas pre-frailty did not. Sarcopenia using other cut-off points for defining low grip strength did not identify mortality risk.

Conclusion: Sarcopenia using <36 kg for men and <23 kg for women as cut-off points seems to be better than the frailty phenotype for identifying the risk of mortality in older adults.

虚弱还是肌肉疏松症:哪个是老年人死亡风险的更好指标?
背景:尽管虚弱和肌肉疏松症属于不同的病症,但它们的共同之处在于:评估步行速度和肌肉力量。本研究旨在比较虚弱表型和肌肉疏松症,采用不同的低握力截断点,以确定哪种表型能更好地识别 14 年随访期内的死亡风险。采用弗里德表型测量虚弱程度。采用不同的低握力截断点对 "肌肉疏松症"(欧洲老年人肌肉疏松症工作组 2)进行定义(结果:当虚弱与肌肉疏松症同时存在时,低握力的截断点为 0.5:当考虑到虚弱症和肌肉疏松症同时存在时,只有截断点是正确的:肌肉疏松症使用
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
100
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health is a leading international journal devoted to publication of original research and reviews covering applied, methodological and theoretical issues with emphasis on studies using multidisciplinary or integrative approaches. The journal aims to improve epidemiological knowledge and ultimately health worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信