Ming Yang1,2, Jing Lu3, Jiaojiao Jiang4, Yanli Zeng5,6, Huairong Tang7. 1. The Center of Gerontology and Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Lane, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 2. Precision Medicine Research Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Lane, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 3. Department of Pharmacy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No 37 Guoxue Lane, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 4. The Center of Rehabilitation, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Lane, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 5. Institute for Disaster Management and Reconstruction, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 6. School of Nursing, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 7. Health Management Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Lane, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 1651682099@qq.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several screening tools have been developed for identifying sarcopenia in elderly nursing home residents. OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of four sarcopenia screening tools in nursing homes: Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment full version (MSRA-7) and short version (MSRA-5), SARC-F, and SARC-F combined with calf circumference (SARC-CalF). METHODS: Elderly nursing home residents (aged ≥ 65 years) were recruited. Four common diagnostic criteria (EWGSOP, AWGS, IWGS, and FNIH) were separately applied as the "gold standard". The sensitivity/specificity analyses of the four tools were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the ROC curves (AUC) were applied to compare the overall diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: We included 277 participants aged 81.6 ± 3.3 years. Using different "gold standards", the sensitivity of SARC-CalF, SARC-F, MSRA-7, and MSRA-5 ranged from 55.7 to 64.4%, from 17.0 to 21.8%, from 53.3 to 57.8%, and from 49.1 to 56.7%, respectively, whereas the specificity ranged from 84.5 to 86.5%, from 96.8 to 98.4%, from 80.2 to 84.2%, and from 82.8 to 84.1%, respectively. Regardless of the "gold standard", SARC-CalF had the largest AUC (from 0.816 to 0.867) among the tools; the AUC of SARC-F (from 0.769 to 0.791) and MSRA-5 (from 0.713 to 0.767) was not significantly different; whereas MSRA-7 had the smallest AUC (from 0.681 to 0.746). CONCLUSION: Among the four screening tools, SARC-CalF appears to be an optimal choice for screening sarcopenia in nursing home residents. SARC-F and MSRA-5 are alternatives, of which, SARC-F has a better specificity and MSRA-5 has a better sensitivity.
BACKGROUND: Several screening tools have been developed for identifying sarcopenia in elderly nursing home residents. OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of four sarcopenia screening tools in nursing homes: Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment full version (MSRA-7) and short version (MSRA-5), SARC-F, and SARC-F combined with calf circumference (SARC-CalF). METHODS: Elderly nursing home residents (aged ≥ 65 years) were recruited. Four common diagnostic criteria (EWGSOP, AWGS, IWGS, and FNIH) were separately applied as the "gold standard". The sensitivity/specificity analyses of the four tools were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the ROC curves (AUC) were applied to compare the overall diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: We included 277 participants aged 81.6 ± 3.3 years. Using different "gold standards", the sensitivity of SARC-CalF, SARC-F, MSRA-7, and MSRA-5 ranged from 55.7 to 64.4%, from 17.0 to 21.8%, from 53.3 to 57.8%, and from 49.1 to 56.7%, respectively, whereas the specificity ranged from 84.5 to 86.5%, from 96.8 to 98.4%, from 80.2 to 84.2%, and from 82.8 to 84.1%, respectively. Regardless of the "gold standard", SARC-CalF had the largest AUC (from 0.816 to 0.867) among the tools; the AUC of SARC-F (from 0.769 to 0.791) and MSRA-5 (from 0.713 to 0.767) was not significantly different; whereas MSRA-7 had the smallest AUC (from 0.681 to 0.746). CONCLUSION: Among the four screening tools, SARC-CalF appears to be an optimal choice for screening sarcopenia in nursing home residents. SARC-F and MSRA-5 are alternatives, of which, SARC-F has a better specificity and MSRA-5 has a better sensitivity.
Authors: Kimberley S van Schooten; Yijian Yang; Lukas Grajauskas; Stephen N Robinovitch Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Roma Krzymińska-Siemaszko; Ewa Deskur-Śmielecka; Aleksandra Kaluźniak-Szymanowska; Marta Lewandowicz; Katarzyna Wieczorowska-Tobis Journal: Clin Interv Aging Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 4.458
Authors: Roma Krzymińska-Siemaszko; Sławomir Tobis; Marta Lewandowicz; Katarzyna Wieczorowska-Tobis Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-04-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Anna Arnal-Gómez; Maria A Cebrià I Iranzo; Jose M Tomas; Maria A Tortosa-Chuliá; Mercè Balasch-Bernat; Trinidad Sentandreu-Mañó; Silvia Forcano; Natalia Cezón-Serrano Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-03-02 Impact factor: 4.241