在社区居住的老年人中寻找 Sarcopenia 的病例:迷你 Sarcopenia 风险评估与 SARC-F 和 SARC-CalF 的比较。

IF 2.8 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-12 DOI:10.4235/agmr.23.0190
Shiyun Chua, Jia Qian Chia, Jun Pei Lim, Justin Chew, Wee Shiong Lim
{"title":"在社区居住的老年人中寻找 Sarcopenia 的病例:迷你 Sarcopenia 风险评估与 SARC-F 和 SARC-CalF 的比较。","authors":"Shiyun Chua, Jia Qian Chia, Jun Pei Lim, Justin Chew, Wee Shiong Lim","doi":"10.4235/agmr.23.0190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We compared the diagnostic performance of the short five-item and full seven-item Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire (MSRA-5 and MSRA-7) against the Strength, Assistance walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, and Falls (SARC-F) and SARC-F with calf circumference (SARC-CalF) scales for sarcopenia in healthy community-dwelling older adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a post-hoc cross-sectional secondary data analysis of a prospective cohort study, using data from 230 older adults (mean age 67.2±7.4 years, 92% Chinese, and 73% female) from the \"Longitudinal Assessment of Biomarkers for characterization of early Sarcopenia and Osteosarcopenic Obesity in predicting frailty and functional decline in community-dwelling Asian older adults Study\" (GeriLABS-2) conducted between December 2017 and March 2019 in Singapore. We performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to ascertain the area under the curve (AUC) for sarcopenia diagnosis using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 consensus criteria. We applied the Delong method to compare the AUCs of the four instruments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 demonstrated poor diagnostic performance (AUC of 0.511, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.433-0.589 and AUC of 0.526, 95% CI 0.445-0.606, respectively), compared to that in SARC-CalF (AUC of 0.739, 95% CI 0.671-0.808) and SARC-F (AUC of 0.564, 95% CI 0.591-0.636). The SARC-CalF demonstrated significantly superior discriminatory ability compared to that in the SARC-F, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 (all p&lt;0.01). The MSRA-5 demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.464) and specificity (0.597) than in the SARC-CalF (0.661 and 0.738, respectively), whereas the MSRA-7 had higher specificity (0.887) and lower sensitivity (0.145).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Conclusions: The poor diagnostic performances of the MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 in our study suggest limitations of self-reported questionnaires for assessing general and dietary risk factors for sarcopenia in healthy and culturally diverse community-dwelling older adults. Studies in different populations are needed to ascertain the utility of the MSRA for the community detection of sarcopenia.</p>","PeriodicalId":44729,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research","volume":" ","pages":"57-64"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10982448/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Case-Finding for Sarcopenia in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Comparison of Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment with SARC-F and SARC-CalF.\",\"authors\":\"Shiyun Chua, Jia Qian Chia, Jun Pei Lim, Justin Chew, Wee Shiong Lim\",\"doi\":\"10.4235/agmr.23.0190\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We compared the diagnostic performance of the short five-item and full seven-item Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire (MSRA-5 and MSRA-7) against the Strength, Assistance walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, and Falls (SARC-F) and SARC-F with calf circumference (SARC-CalF) scales for sarcopenia in healthy community-dwelling older adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a post-hoc cross-sectional secondary data analysis of a prospective cohort study, using data from 230 older adults (mean age 67.2±7.4 years, 92% Chinese, and 73% female) from the \\\"Longitudinal Assessment of Biomarkers for characterization of early Sarcopenia and Osteosarcopenic Obesity in predicting frailty and functional decline in community-dwelling Asian older adults Study\\\" (GeriLABS-2) conducted between December 2017 and March 2019 in Singapore. We performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to ascertain the area under the curve (AUC) for sarcopenia diagnosis using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 consensus criteria. We applied the Delong method to compare the AUCs of the four instruments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 demonstrated poor diagnostic performance (AUC of 0.511, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.433-0.589 and AUC of 0.526, 95% CI 0.445-0.606, respectively), compared to that in SARC-CalF (AUC of 0.739, 95% CI 0.671-0.808) and SARC-F (AUC of 0.564, 95% CI 0.591-0.636). The SARC-CalF demonstrated significantly superior discriminatory ability compared to that in the SARC-F, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 (all p&lt;0.01). The MSRA-5 demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.464) and specificity (0.597) than in the SARC-CalF (0.661 and 0.738, respectively), whereas the MSRA-7 had higher specificity (0.887) and lower sensitivity (0.145).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Conclusions: The poor diagnostic performances of the MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 in our study suggest limitations of self-reported questionnaires for assessing general and dietary risk factors for sarcopenia in healthy and culturally diverse community-dwelling older adults. Studies in different populations are needed to ascertain the utility of the MSRA for the community detection of sarcopenia.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44729,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"57-64\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10982448/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.23.0190\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Geriatric Medicine and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4235/agmr.23.0190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:我们比较了迷你型肌肉疏松症风险评估问卷(MSRA-5 和 MSRA-7)与力量、协助行走、从椅子上站起、爬楼梯和跌倒量表(SARC-F)和 SARC-F 加小腿围度量表(SARC-CalF)对社区健康老年人肌肉疏松症的诊断性能:我们对一项前瞻性队列研究进行了事后横断面二次数据分析,使用的数据来自2017年12月至2019年3月期间在新加坡进行的 "早期肌少症和骨质疏松性肥胖症预测亚洲社区老年人虚弱和功能衰退的生物标志物特征纵向评估研究"(GeriLABS-2)中的230名老年人(平均年龄为67.2 ± 7.4岁,92%为中国人,73%为女性)。我们采用亚洲肌肉疏松症工作组(AWGS)2019 年共识标准进行了接收器操作特征曲线分析,以确定肌肉疏松症诊断的曲线下面积(AUC)。我们采用德隆法比较了四种工具的AUC:结果:MSRA-5 和 MSRA-7 的诊断性能较差(AUC:0.511,95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.433-0.589):SARC-CalF(AUC:0.739,95%CI:0.671-0.808)和 SARC-F(AUC:0.564,95%CI:0.591-0.636)相比,MSRA-5 和 MSRA-7 的诊断性能较差(AUC:0.511,95%置信区间 [CI]:0.433-0.589 和 0.526,95%CI:0.445-0.606)。与 SARC-F、MSRA-5 和 MSRA-7 相比,SARC-CalF 的判别能力明显更强(所有 p 结论):在我们的研究中,MSRA-5 和 MSRA-7 的诊断性能较差,这表明自我报告问卷在评估健康且文化多样的社区老年人肌少症的一般和饮食风险因素方面存在局限性。我们需要对不同人群进行研究,以确定 MSRA 在社区肌少症检测中的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Case-Finding for Sarcopenia in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Comparison of Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment with SARC-F and SARC-CalF.

Background: We compared the diagnostic performance of the short five-item and full seven-item Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire (MSRA-5 and MSRA-7) against the Strength, Assistance walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, and Falls (SARC-F) and SARC-F with calf circumference (SARC-CalF) scales for sarcopenia in healthy community-dwelling older adults.

Methods: We conducted a post-hoc cross-sectional secondary data analysis of a prospective cohort study, using data from 230 older adults (mean age 67.2±7.4 years, 92% Chinese, and 73% female) from the "Longitudinal Assessment of Biomarkers for characterization of early Sarcopenia and Osteosarcopenic Obesity in predicting frailty and functional decline in community-dwelling Asian older adults Study" (GeriLABS-2) conducted between December 2017 and March 2019 in Singapore. We performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to ascertain the area under the curve (AUC) for sarcopenia diagnosis using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 consensus criteria. We applied the Delong method to compare the AUCs of the four instruments.

Results: The MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 demonstrated poor diagnostic performance (AUC of 0.511, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.433-0.589 and AUC of 0.526, 95% CI 0.445-0.606, respectively), compared to that in SARC-CalF (AUC of 0.739, 95% CI 0.671-0.808) and SARC-F (AUC of 0.564, 95% CI 0.591-0.636). The SARC-CalF demonstrated significantly superior discriminatory ability compared to that in the SARC-F, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 (all p<0.01). The MSRA-5 demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.464) and specificity (0.597) than in the SARC-CalF (0.661 and 0.738, respectively), whereas the MSRA-7 had higher specificity (0.887) and lower sensitivity (0.145).

Conclusion: Conclusions: The poor diagnostic performances of the MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 in our study suggest limitations of self-reported questionnaires for assessing general and dietary risk factors for sarcopenia in healthy and culturally diverse community-dwelling older adults. Studies in different populations are needed to ascertain the utility of the MSRA for the community detection of sarcopenia.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信