M Halil1, Z Ulger2, M Varlı3, A Döventaş4, G B Oztürk5, M E Kuyumcu1, B B Yavuz1, Y Yesil1, F Tufan5, M Cankurtaran1, B Saka5, S Sahin6, A Curgunlu7, N Tekin8, F Akçiçek6, M A Karan5, T Atlı3, T Beger4, D S Erdinçler4, S Arıoğul1. 1. Hacettepe University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Ankara, Turkey. 2. Gazi University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Ankara, Turkey. 3. Ankara University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Ankara, Turkey. 4. Istanbul University, Faculty of Cerrahpasa Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey. 5. Istanbul University, Faculty of Istanbul Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey. 6. Ege University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Izmir, Turkey. 7. Istanbul Bilim University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey. 8. Narlidere Geriatric Care Center and Residential Home, Izmir, Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: Sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity (SO) are geriatric syndromes leading to physical disability, poor quality of life and death. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia and SO in nursing homes in Turkey and to define local disparities for diagnosing sarcopenia and SO. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: This cross-sectional multicenter study was performed in 711 patients in 14 nursing homes. Comprehensive geriatric assessment tests, handgrip strength and calf circumference (CC) measurements were carried out. Sarcopenia was both defined by handgrip strength and CC criteria. RESULTS: According to handgrip strength measurement, 483 (68%) of patients were sarcopenic (male: 72%, female: 63.8%), 228 were non-sarcopenic. The prevalence of SO was 22% (13.7% in men, 30.2% in women). Patients (82.5%) who were diagnosed as sarcopenic by the handgrip strength test were not sarcopenic according to CC sarcopenia criteria. Therefore, we tried to determine the optimal CC value for diagnosing sarcopenia in our population. CONCLUSIONS: Both sarcopenia and SO were prevalent among Turkish nursing home elderly residents. Most of the patients with sarcopenia were obese or overweight. We showed that diagnosing sarcopenia with CC measurement underestimated the sarcopenia prevalence assessed by handgrip strength. So we concluded that, although different assessment methods are recommended for the diagnosis of sarcopenia local disparities should be considered.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES:Sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity (SO) are geriatric syndromes leading to physical disability, poor quality of life and death. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia and SO in nursing homes in Turkey and to define local disparities for diagnosing sarcopenia and SO. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: This cross-sectional multicenter study was performed in 711 patients in 14 nursing homes. Comprehensive geriatric assessment tests, handgrip strength and calf circumference (CC) measurements were carried out. Sarcopenia was both defined by handgrip strength and CC criteria. RESULTS: According to handgrip strength measurement, 483 (68%) of patients were sarcopenic (male: 72%, female: 63.8%), 228 were non-sarcopenic. The prevalence of SO was 22% (13.7% in men, 30.2% in women). Patients (82.5%) who were diagnosed as sarcopenic by the handgrip strength test were not sarcopenic according to CC sarcopenia criteria. Therefore, we tried to determine the optimal CC value for diagnosing sarcopenia in our population. CONCLUSIONS: Both sarcopenia and SO were prevalent among Turkish nursing home elderly residents. Most of the patients with sarcopenia were obese or overweight. We showed that diagnosing sarcopenia with CC measurement underestimated the sarcopenia prevalence assessed by handgrip strength. So we concluded that, although different assessment methods are recommended for the diagnosis of sarcopenia local disparities should be considered.
Authors: Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Francesco Landi; Eva Topinková; Jean-Pierre Michel Journal: Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.294
Authors: L P Fried; C M Tangen; J Walston; A B Newman; C Hirsch; J Gottdiener; T Seeman; R Tracy; W J Kop; G Burke; M A McBurnie Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Jean Pierre Baeyens; Jürgen M Bauer; Yves Boirie; Tommy Cederholm; Francesco Landi; Finbarr C Martin; Jean-Pierre Michel; Yves Rolland; Stéphane M Schneider; Eva Topinková; Maurits Vandewoude; Mauro Zamboni Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2010-04-13 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Matteo Cesari; Roger A Fielding; Marco Pahor; Bret Goodpaster; Marc Hellerstein; Gabor A van Kan; Stefan D Anker; Seward Rutkove; J Willem Vrijbloed; Maria Isaac; Yves Rolland; Christine M'rini; Mylène Aubertin-Leheudre; Jesse M Cedarbaum; Mauro Zamboni; Cornell C Sieber; Didier Laurent; William J Evans; Ronenn Roubenoff; John E Morley; Bruno Vellas Journal: J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle Date: 2012-08-03 Impact factor: 12.910
Authors: M C Kizilarslanoglu; M K Kilic; R T Dogrul; F Sumer; H D Varan; M E Kuyumcu; Y Yesil; M Halil Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2016-02-24 Impact factor: 4.016