Comparative analysis of the maximal respiratory pressure and peak expiratory flow rate in diagnosing probable respiratory sarcopenia – The Otassha Study

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Takeshi Kera, Hisashi Kawai, Manami Ejiri, Keigo Imamura, Hirohiko Hirano, Yoshinori Fujiwara, Kazushige Ihara, Shuichi Obuchi
{"title":"Comparative analysis of the maximal respiratory pressure and peak expiratory flow rate in diagnosing probable respiratory sarcopenia – The Otassha Study","authors":"Takeshi Kera,&nbsp;Hisashi Kawai,&nbsp;Manami Ejiri,&nbsp;Keigo Imamura,&nbsp;Hirohiko Hirano,&nbsp;Yoshinori Fujiwara,&nbsp;Kazushige Ihara,&nbsp;Shuichi Obuchi","doi":"10.1111/ggi.70124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>The availability of diverse assessment methods, based on different devices and conditions, for respiratory sarcopenia is crucial for developing community health initiatives. Thus, in this study, we aimed to compare the concordance in diagnosing respiratory sarcopenia based on the maximal respiratory pressure (MRP) and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), which are specific indicators of respiratory-muscle strength, in a community-dwelling older adult population.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In the Otassha Study conducted in 2023, 499 community-dwelling adults aged &gt;65 years in Itabashi Ward (184 men and 315 women) were evaluated for MRP, PEFR, walking speed, grip strength, and appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM). We determined two respiratory-sarcopenia models using low skeletal muscle mass and low MRP/PEFR (both &lt;80% for predicted values). Pearson correlation coefficients were used to compare each measurement; the agreement between respiratory sarcopenia diagnosed using low MRP and PEFR was evaluated using kappa coefficients (κ).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>PEFR was correlated with MRP (maximal expiratory pressure: <i>r</i> = 0.415; maximal inspiratory pressure: <i>r</i> = 0.380; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01, respectively). A moderate level of agreement was found between respiratory sarcopenia diagnosed using MRP and that diagnosed using PEFR (κ = 0.597, match rate = 87.2%), suggesting a fair consistency level between the methods.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Although PEFR had a moderate correlation with MRP, the concordance of respiratory sarcopenia diagnosed using the two methods was moderate, suggesting that the two approaches are partially interchangeable and are complementary. The findings showed that PEFR, proposed as an alternative to MRP, is valid for diagnosing respiratory sarcopenia, supporting its role as an alternative to the gold standard for evaluating respiratory-muscle strength. <b>Geriatr Gerontol Int 2025; 25: 1253–1259</b>.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12546,"journal":{"name":"Geriatrics & Gerontology International","volume":"25 9","pages":"1253-1259"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geriatrics & Gerontology International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ggi.70124","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

The availability of diverse assessment methods, based on different devices and conditions, for respiratory sarcopenia is crucial for developing community health initiatives. Thus, in this study, we aimed to compare the concordance in diagnosing respiratory sarcopenia based on the maximal respiratory pressure (MRP) and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), which are specific indicators of respiratory-muscle strength, in a community-dwelling older adult population.

Methods

In the Otassha Study conducted in 2023, 499 community-dwelling adults aged >65 years in Itabashi Ward (184 men and 315 women) were evaluated for MRP, PEFR, walking speed, grip strength, and appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM). We determined two respiratory-sarcopenia models using low skeletal muscle mass and low MRP/PEFR (both <80% for predicted values). Pearson correlation coefficients were used to compare each measurement; the agreement between respiratory sarcopenia diagnosed using low MRP and PEFR was evaluated using kappa coefficients (κ).

Results

PEFR was correlated with MRP (maximal expiratory pressure: r = 0.415; maximal inspiratory pressure: r = 0.380; P < 0.01, respectively). A moderate level of agreement was found between respiratory sarcopenia diagnosed using MRP and that diagnosed using PEFR (κ = 0.597, match rate = 87.2%), suggesting a fair consistency level between the methods.

Conclusions

Although PEFR had a moderate correlation with MRP, the concordance of respiratory sarcopenia diagnosed using the two methods was moderate, suggesting that the two approaches are partially interchangeable and are complementary. The findings showed that PEFR, proposed as an alternative to MRP, is valid for diagnosing respiratory sarcopenia, supporting its role as an alternative to the gold standard for evaluating respiratory-muscle strength. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2025; 25: 1253–1259.

最大呼吸压和呼气峰流速诊断可能的呼吸性肌肉减少症的比较分析-奥塔沙研究。
目的:基于不同设备和条件的呼吸性肌肉减少症的多种评估方法的可用性对于制定社区卫生倡议至关重要。因此,在本研究中,我们旨在比较基于最大呼吸压(MRP)和呼气峰流量(PEFR)诊断呼吸性肌肉减少症的一致性,这是呼吸肌力量的具体指标,在社区居住的老年人人群中。方法:在2023年进行的Otassha研究中,对板桥区499名年龄在bb0 - 65岁的社区居民(184名男性和315名女性)进行MRP、PEFR、步行速度、握力和尾骨骼肌质量(ASM)的评估。我们使用低骨骼肌质量和低MRP/PEFR确定了两种呼吸性肌肉减少症模型(结果:PEFR与MRP相关(最大呼气压:r = 0.415;最大吸气压力:r = 0.380;结论:尽管PEFR与MRP有中度相关性,但两种方法诊断的呼吸性肌肉减少症的一致性是中度的,这表明两种方法是部分可互换的,是互补的。研究结果表明,PEFR作为MRP的替代方案,可有效诊断呼吸性肌肉减少症,支持其作为评估呼吸肌力量的金标准的替代方案。Geriatr Gerontol 2025;••: ••-••.
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
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
6.10%
发文量
189
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Geriatrics & Gerontology International is the official Journal of the Japan Geriatrics Society, reflecting the growing importance of the subject area in developed economies and their particular significance to a country like Japan with a large aging population. Geriatrics & Gerontology International is now an international publication with contributions from around the world and published four times per year.
×
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