Standardized Measurement of Muscle Strength and Physical Performance for Sarcopenia: An Expert-Based Delphi Consensus.

IF 3.2 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-06-11 DOI:10.4235/agmr.25.0070
Seung-Kyu Lim, Jaewon Beom, Sang Yoon Lee, Kyunghoon Min, Seong-Eun Byun, Yonghan Cha, Jun Hwan Choi, Jung-Yeon Choi, Jae-Young Han, Hak-Chul Jang, Hee-Won Jung, Kwang-Il Kim, Younji Kim, Young-Sang Kim, Jong Hwa Lee, Jong In Lee, Seung Yeol Lee, Kil-Byung Lim, Bumjo Oh, Sae-Jong Park, Ga Yang Shim, Wook Song, Chang Won Won, Jun-Il Yoo, Seung Don Yoo, Jae-Young Lim
{"title":"Standardized Measurement of Muscle Strength and Physical Performance for Sarcopenia: An Expert-Based Delphi Consensus.","authors":"Seung-Kyu Lim, Jaewon Beom, Sang Yoon Lee, Kyunghoon Min, Seong-Eun Byun, Yonghan Cha, Jun Hwan Choi, Jung-Yeon Choi, Jae-Young Han, Hak-Chul Jang, Hee-Won Jung, Kwang-Il Kim, Younji Kim, Young-Sang Kim, Jong Hwa Lee, Jong In Lee, Seung Yeol Lee, Kil-Byung Lim, Bumjo Oh, Sae-Jong Park, Ga Yang Shim, Wook Song, Chang Won Won, Jun-Il Yoo, Seung Don Yoo, Jae-Young Lim","doi":"10.4235/agmr.25.0070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite updated sarcopenia guidelines, inconsistent protocols still cause clinical confusion and may compromise diagnostic and outcome accuracy. This Delphi study aimed to establish expert consensus to support the standardization of muscle strength and physical performance assessments for sarcopenia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-round modified Delphi study was conducted with 26 experts in geriatrics and sarcopenia. Participants completed two rounds of anonymous questionnaires evaluating 39 items across seven domains using a nine-point Likert scale or choice-based questions. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 27 of 38 statements (71.1%) reached consensus across two rounds Experts supported further standardization of assessments in alignment with the Asian and Korean Working Group on Sarcopenia (AWGS and KWGS) guidelines. For handgrip strength, consensus was achieved on using both mechanical and hydraulic dynamometers, hydraulic protocols, value selection, measurement time, and positioning, but not on mechanical protocols, repetitions, recovery intervals, repetitions, or unified cutoff values. For calf circumference, consensus was reached on measurement position, method, and value selection, but not on guideline application. In gait speed assessment, agreement was reached on speed, repetitions, assistive device use, and equipment type, but not on value selection, distance, acceleration/deceleration phases, or device interchangeability. For the 400-m walk test, the KWGS guideline and speed were endorsed. Chair stand test (CST) and Timed up-and-go (TUG) test reached consensus on armrest use, value selection, and repetitions, but not on seat height, (CST), or speed (TUG).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights areas of agreement and ongoing uncertainty, supporting future standardization efforts sarcopenia assessment methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":44729,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research","volume":" ","pages":"185-198"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12214977/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4235/agmr.25.0070","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite updated sarcopenia guidelines, inconsistent protocols still cause clinical confusion and may compromise diagnostic and outcome accuracy. This Delphi study aimed to establish expert consensus to support the standardization of muscle strength and physical performance assessments for sarcopenia.

Methods: A two-round modified Delphi study was conducted with 26 experts in geriatrics and sarcopenia. Participants completed two rounds of anonymous questionnaires evaluating 39 items across seven domains using a nine-point Likert scale or choice-based questions. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement.

Results: In total, 27 of 38 statements (71.1%) reached consensus across two rounds Experts supported further standardization of assessments in alignment with the Asian and Korean Working Group on Sarcopenia (AWGS and KWGS) guidelines. For handgrip strength, consensus was achieved on using both mechanical and hydraulic dynamometers, hydraulic protocols, value selection, measurement time, and positioning, but not on mechanical protocols, repetitions, recovery intervals, repetitions, or unified cutoff values. For calf circumference, consensus was reached on measurement position, method, and value selection, but not on guideline application. In gait speed assessment, agreement was reached on speed, repetitions, assistive device use, and equipment type, but not on value selection, distance, acceleration/deceleration phases, or device interchangeability. For the 400-m walk test, the KWGS guideline and speed were endorsed. Chair stand test (CST) and Timed up-and-go (TUG) test reached consensus on armrest use, value selection, and repetitions, but not on seat height, (CST), or speed (TUG).

Conclusion: This study highlights areas of agreement and ongoing uncertainty, supporting future standardization efforts sarcopenia assessment methods.

肌肉减少症的身体表现和肌肉力量的标准化测量:基于专家的德尔菲共识。
背景:尽管更新了肌少症指南,但不一致的方案仍然会导致临床混乱,并可能损害诊断和结果的准确性。本德尔菲研究旨在建立专家共识,以支持肌肉减少症的肌肉力量和体能评估的标准化。方法:对26名老年医学和肌肉减少症专家进行两轮修正德尔菲研究。参与者完成了两轮匿名问卷,使用李克特九分量表或选择题评估七个领域的39个项目。一致定义为≥75%的同意。结果:总共38个声明中有27个(71.1%)在两轮中达成了共识。专家们支持进一步标准化评估,以与亚洲和韩国肌肉减少症工作组(AWGS和KWGS)指南保持一致。对于握力,在使用机械和液压测功机、液压方案、值选择、测量时间和定位方面达成了共识,但在机械方案、重复、恢复间隔、重复或统一截止值方面没有达成共识。对于小腿围,在测量位置、方法和值的选择上达成了共识,但在指南的应用上没有达成共识。在步态速度评估中,在速度、重复次数、辅助装置的使用和设备类型上达成了一致,但在数值选择、距离、加速/减速阶段或设备互换性上没有达成一致。对于400米步行测试,采用KWGS指南和速度。椅子站立(CST)和计时出发(TUG)测试在扶手的使用、价值选择和重复次数上达成了共识,但在座椅高度(CST)或速度(TUG)上没有达成共识。结论:本研究突出了一致和不确定的领域,支持未来肌肉减少症评估方法的标准化工作。
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
Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research
Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
35
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信