Literature DB >> 27481122

Populations and outcome measures used in ongoing research in sarcopenia.

Gloria Gabriela Peña Ordóñez1, Lilia Patricia Bustamante Montes2, Ninfa Ramírez Duran2, Carmen Sánchez Castellano2,3, Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia research may be hampered by the heterogeneity of populations and outcome measures used in clinical studies. AIM: The aim of this study was to describe the inclusion/exclusion criteria and outcome measures used in ongoing research in sarcopenia.
METHODS: All active intervention studies registered in the World Health Organization with the keyword sarcopenia were included. Study design, type of intervention, inclusion/exclusion criteria and outcome measures were registered and classified.
RESULTS: In April 2014, 151 studies on sarcopenia were registered in the WHO database. One hundred twenty-three were intervention studies. Most trials (94.3 %) were single centre and randomized (93.5 %), 51.2 % were double blind. Nutritional interventions (36.6 %), physical exercise (12.2 %) or both (19.5 %) were the most common interventions tested. Only 54.4 % included subjects of both genders, and 46.3 % had an upper age limit. Definition of the target populations was heterogeneous, with 57.7 % including healthy subjects and none using recent definitions of sarcopenia. Lifestyle and the degree of physical activity of subjects were not described or considered in most cases (79.7 %). Subjects with cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric or metabolic disorders and those with physical disability were usually excluded. Muscle mass and muscle strength were the primary outcome variables in 28.5 and 29.5 % of studies and physical performance in 19.5 %, but only 4.1 % used the three variables used the three of them. An additional 26.8 % used biological outcome variables. Little information and agreement existed in the way muscle and physical performance parameters were measured.
CONCLUSIONS: We found a large heterogeneity in trial design, definition of populations and outcome measures in present research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical trials; Inclusion/exclusion criteria; Outcomes; Sarcopenia

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27481122     DOI: 10.1007/s40520-016-0610-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res        ISSN: 1594-0667            Impact factor:   3.636


  4 in total

Review 1.  [Diagnosis and therapy of sarcopenia-an update].

Authors:  S Goisser; R Kob; C C Sieber; J M Bauer
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 0.743

2.  Development and validation of a short version of the Sarcopenia Quality of Life questionnaire: the SF-SarQoL.

Authors:  A Geerinck; C Beaudart; J-Y Reginster; M Locquet; C Monseur; S Gillain; O Bruyère
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 3.  Nonpharmacological interventions to treat physical frailty and sarcopenia in older patients: a systematic overview - the SENATOR Project ONTOP Series.

Authors:  Isabel Lozano-Montoya; Andrea Correa-Pérez; Iosief Abraha; Roy L Soiza; Antonio Cherubini; Denis O'Mahony; Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 4.458

4.  Quality of life in sarcopenia measured with the SarQoL®: impact of the use of different diagnosis definitions.

Authors:  Charlotte Beaudart; Médéa Locquet; Jean-Yves Reginster; Laura Delandsheere; Jean Petermans; Olivier Bruyère
Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 3.636

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.