Literature DB >> 33247326

Cutpoints for Muscle Mass and Strength Derived from Weakness or Mobility Impairment and Compared with Other Diagnostic Criteria in Community-Dwelling Elderly People.

Hong-Qi Xu1, Jia-Qi Sun2, Yu Liu3, Liao Tian1, Jing-Min Liu4, Ji-Peng Shi5, Min Liu3, Xiu-Yuan Zheng4.   

Abstract

We identified the strength cutpoints concerning mobility impairment, then identified the muscle mass cutpoints concerning weakness, and compared the results with other diagnostic criteria to develop the clinical diagnostic criteria associated with functional impairment. In 7583 elderly people, classification and regression tree (CART) and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analyses were used for determining cutpoints for handgrip strength (HGS) and appendicular lean mass (ALM) indices associated with slowness or weakness. Logistic regressions were then used to quantify the strength of the association between muscle mass (or strength) categories and weakness (or slowness). The CART second cutpoints of muscle mass and strength indices were lower than those specified by the ROC method and were between those cutpoints determined by the 20th and Mean-2SD methods. After adjusting for covariates, the associations remained significant in handgrip strength categories defined by the CART and ROC cutpoints and HGS/BMI categories defined by the CART, ROC, and 20th cutpoints in men and women (P < 0.05), ALM, ALM/Ht2 categories defined by all four cutpoints (P < 0.05) and ALM/BMI categories defined by CART and ROC cutpoints in men (P < 0.05), and ALM and ALM/Ht2 categories defined by the CART cutpoints in women (P < 0.05). Our approaches resulted in a definition of weak strength as handgrip strength or HGS/BMI less than 26.55 kg or 1.114 in men and less than 16.45 kg or 0.697 in women and then defined ALM, ALM/Ht2, or ALM/BMI less than 18.92 kg, 7.08 kg/m2, or 0.795 in men and less than 15.04 kg, 5.99 kg/m2, or 0.517 in women as low lean mass.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cutpoints; Muscle mass; Muscle strength; Physical performance; Sarcopenia

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33247326     DOI: 10.1007/s00223-020-00778-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int        ISSN: 0171-967X            Impact factor:   4.333


  24 in total

1.  Sarcopenia-related features and factors associated with low muscle mass, weak muscle strength, and reduced function in Chinese rural residents: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Hong-Qi Xu; Ji-Peng Shi; Chong Shen; Yu Liu; Jing-Min Liu; Xiu-Yuan Zheng
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2018-12-17       Impact factor: 2.617

Review 2.  Sarcopenia: Prevalence and associated factors based on different suggested definitions in community-dwelling older adults.

Authors:  Hunkyung Kim; Hirohiko Hirano; Ayako Edahiro; Yuki Ohara; Yutaka Watanabe; Narumi Kojima; Miji Kim; Erika Hosoi; Yuko Yoshida; Hideyo Yoshida; Shoji Shinkai
Journal:  Geriatr Gerontol Int       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.730

3.  Differences in body composition and physical functions associated with sarcopenia in Chinese elderly: reference values and prevalence.

Authors:  Ping Zeng; Sinan Wu; Yiwen Han; Jingmin Liu; Yi Zhang; Enyi Zhang; Yan Zhang; Huan Gong; Jing Pang; Zhili Tang; Hongxing Liu; Xiuyuan Zheng; Tiemei Zhang
Journal:  Arch Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2014-08-24       Impact factor: 3.250

Review 4.  Developing consensus criteria for sarcopenia: an update.

Authors:  Robert R McLean; Douglas P Kiel
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  Age-associated declines in muscle mass, strength, power, and physical performance: impact on fear of falling and quality of life.

Authors:  A Trombetti; K F Reid; M Hars; F R Herrmann; E Pasha; E M Phillips; R A Fielding
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Muscle strength: A better index of low physical performance than muscle mass in older adults.

Authors:  Yeo Hyung Kim; Kwang-Il Kim; Nam-Jong Paik; Ki-Woong Kim; Hak Chul Jang; Jae-Young Lim
Journal:  Geriatr Gerontol Int       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 2.730

7.  Sarcopenia: an undiagnosed condition in older adults. Current consensus definition: prevalence, etiology, and consequences. International working group on sarcopenia.

Authors:  Roger A Fielding; Bruno Vellas; William J Evans; Shalender Bhasin; John E Morley; Anne B Newman; Gabor Abellan van Kan; Sandrine Andrieu; Juergen Bauer; Denis Breuille; Tommy Cederholm; Julie Chandler; Capucine De Meynard; Lorenzo Donini; Tamara Harris; Aimo Kannt; Florence Keime Guibert; Graziano Onder; Dimitris Papanicolaou; Yves Rolland; Daniel Rooks; Cornel Sieber; Elisabeth Souhami; Sjors Verlaan; Mauro Zamboni
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2011-03-04       Impact factor: 4.669

8.  Sarcopenia in Asia: consensus report of the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia.

Authors:  Liang-Kung Chen; Li-Kuo Liu; Jean Woo; Prasert Assantachai; Tung-Wai Auyeung; Kamaruzzaman Shahrul Bahyah; Ming-Yueh Chou; Liang-Yu Chen; Pi-Shan Hsu; Orapitchaya Krairit; Jenny S W Lee; Wei-Ju Lee; Yunhwan Lee; Chih-Kuang Liang; Panita Limpawattana; Chu-Sheng Lin; Li-Ning Peng; Shosuke Satake; Takao Suzuki; Chang Won Won; Chih-Hsing Wu; Si-Nan Wu; Teimei Zhang; Ping Zeng; Masahiro Akishita; Hidenori Arai
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.669

9.  Age-related decline in skeletal muscle mass and function among elderly men and women in Shanghai, China: a cross sectional study.

Authors:  Hui-Jing Bai; Jian-Qin Sun; Min Chen; Dan-Feng Xu; Hua Xie; Zhuo-Wei Yu; Zhi-Jun Bao; Jie Chen; Yi-Ru Pan; Da-Jiang Lu; Sulin Cheng
Journal:  Asia Pac J Clin Nutr       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 1.662

10.  Sarcopenia-related features and factors associated with lower muscle strength and physical performance in older Chinese: a cross sectional study.

Authors:  Ping Zeng; Yiwen Han; Jing Pang; Sinan Wu; Huan Gong; Jianguo Zhu; Jian Li; Tiemei Zhang
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 3.921

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.