Anton Geerinck1, Bess Dawson-Hughes2, Charlotte Beaudart3, Médéa Locquet3, Jean-Yves Reginster3,4, Olivier Bruyère3,5,6. 1. Division of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Ageing, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium. Anton.geerinck@uliege.be. 2. Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Division of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Ageing, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium. 4. Chair for Biomarkers of Chronic Diseases, Biochemistry Department, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 5. Department of Sport Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium. 6. Physical, Rehabilitation Medicine and Sports Traumatology, SportS2, University Hospital of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because of its low prevalence and the need for physical tests to establish a diagnosis, recruiting sarcopenic people for clinical studies can be a resource-intensive process. AIMS: We investigated whether the SarQoL®, a 55-item questionnaire designed to measure quality of life in sarcopenia, could be used to identify older people with a high likelihood of being sarcopenic, and to compare its performance to the SARC-F tool. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of data from older, community-dwelling participants of the SarcoPhAge study, evaluated for sarcopenia according to the EWGSOP2 criteria, and who completed the SarQoL® and SARC-F questionnaires. We determined the optimal threshold to distinguish between sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic people with the Youden index. Screening performance was evaluated with the area under the curve (AUC) and by calculating sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The analysis of 309 participants provided an optimal threshold value of ≤ 52.4 points for identifying people with sarcopenia with the SarQoL® questionnaire, which resulted in a sensitivity of 64.7% (41.1-84.2%), a specificity of 80.5% (75.7-84.7%) and an AUC of 0.771 (0.652-0.889). Compared to the SARC-F, the SarQoL® has greater sensitivity (64.7% vs 52.39%), but slightly lower specificity (80.5% vs. 86.6%). DISCUSSION: The SarQoL® questionnaire showed acceptable screening accuracy, on par with the SARC-F. The optimal threshold of ≤ 52.4 points should be confirmed in other cohorts of older people. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study showed that the SarQoL® could potentially be applied in a screening strategy, with the added benefit of providing a measure of QoL at the same time.
BACKGROUND: Because of its low prevalence and the need for physical tests to establish a diagnosis, recruiting sarcopenicpeople for clinical studies can be a resource-intensive process. AIMS: We investigated whether the SarQoL®, a 55-item questionnaire designed to measure quality of life in sarcopenia, could be used to identify older people with a high likelihood of being sarcopenic, and to compare its performance to the SARC-F tool. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of data from older, community-dwelling participants of the SarcoPhAge study, evaluated for sarcopenia according to the EWGSOP2 criteria, and who completed the SarQoL® and SARC-F questionnaires. We determined the optimal threshold to distinguish between sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic people with the Youden index. Screening performance was evaluated with the area under the curve (AUC) and by calculating sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The analysis of 309 participants provided an optimal threshold value of ≤ 52.4 points for identifying people with sarcopenia with the SarQoL® questionnaire, which resulted in a sensitivity of 64.7% (41.1-84.2%), a specificity of 80.5% (75.7-84.7%) and an AUC of 0.771 (0.652-0.889). Compared to the SARC-F, the SarQoL® has greater sensitivity (64.7% vs 52.39%), but slightly lower specificity (80.5% vs. 86.6%). DISCUSSION: The SarQoL® questionnaire showed acceptable screening accuracy, on par with the SARC-F. The optimal threshold of ≤ 52.4 points should be confirmed in other cohorts of older people. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study showed that the SarQoL® could potentially be applied in a screening strategy, with the added benefit of providing a measure of QoL at the same time.
Authors: Médéa Locquet; Charlotte Beaudart; Jean Petermans; Jean-Yves Reginster; Olivier Bruyère Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2019-01-17 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Maria Tsekoura; Evdokia Billis; John Gliatis; Elias Tsepis; Charalampos Matzaroglou; Giorgios K Sakkas; Charlotte Beaudart; Olivier Bruyere; Minos Tyllianakis; Elias Panagiotopoulos Journal: Disabil Rehabil Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 3.033
Authors: Charlotte Beaudart; Mark Edwards; Charlotte Moss; Jean-Yves Reginster; Rebecca Moon; Camille Parsons; Christophe Demoulin; René Rizzoli; Emmanuel Biver; Elaine Dennison; Olivier Bruyere; Cyrus Cooper Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Anton Geerinck; Vidmantas Alekna; Charlotte Beaudart; Ivan Bautmans; Cyrus Cooper; Fabiana De Souza Orlandi; Jerzy Konstantynowicz; Beatriz Montero-Errasquín; Eva Topinková; Maria Tsekoura; Jean-Yves Reginster; Olivier Bruyère Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Carlos Guillamón-Escudero; Angela Diago-Galmés; David Zuazua Rico; Alba Maestro-González; Jose M Tenías-Burillo; Jose M Soriano; Julio J Fernández-Garrido Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 4.614