Estimation of sarcopenia prevalence using various assessment tools
Estimation of sarcopenia prevalence using various assessment tools
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.exger.2014.11.014
复制
发表时间：
2015-01-01
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
Bruyere, O.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Beaudart, C.;Reginster, J. Y.;Bruyere, O.
背景资料：肌肉减少症被定义为肌肉质量的进行性和全身性损失，伴有肌肉力量损失或体能损失，但没有关于必须使用的诊断工具的建议。在这项研究中，我们比较了使用不同的诊断tools.Methods：评估肌肉减少症的患病率，以衡量肌肉质量，肌肉力量和体能，我们使用了两种不同的诊断工具，为每个结果。对于肌肉质量，我们使用双能X射线吸收测定法（DXA）和生物电阻抗分析（BIA）;对于肌肉力量，我们使用液压测力计和气动测力计;对于身体性能，我们使用短身体性能电池测试（SPPB测试）和步行速度。据此建立了8个诊断组。结果：在比利时列日的一家门诊诊所，共招募了250名连续受试者。肌肉减少症的估计患病率从8.4%到27.6%不等，这取决于所使用的诊断方法。关于肌肉质量，与DXA相比，BIA系统性地高估了肌肉质量（BIA的平均估计患病率= 12.8%; DXA的平均患病率= 21%）。对于肌肉力量，气动测力计诊断的肌肉减少症受试者比液压测力计多两倍（PD的平均估计患病率= 22.4%; HD的平均估计患病率= 11.4%）。最后，当使用步行速度或SPPB测试时，没有观察到患病率的差异。一个弱的整体kappa系数观察（0.53），这表明8种诊断方法是适度concordant.Conclusion：在相同的定义肌肉减少症，肌肉减少症的患病率是高度依赖于所使用的诊断工具。(C)2014爱思唯尔公司All rights reserved.
Background: Sarcopenia is defined as a progressive and generalized loss of muscle mass with either a loss of muscle strength or a loss of physical performance but there is no recommendation regarding the diagnostic tools that have to be used. In this study, we compared the prevalence of sarcopenia assessed using different diagnostic tools.Methods: To measure muscle mass, muscle strength and physical performance, we used for each outcome two different diagnostic tools. For muscle mass, we used Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXA) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA); for muscle strength, we used a hydraulic dynamometer and a pneumatic dynamometer; for physical performance we used the Short Physical Performance Battery test (SPPB test) and the walk speed. Eight diagnostic groups were hereby established.Results: A total of 250 consecutive subjects were recruited in an outpatient clinic in Liege, Belgium. Estimated prevalence of sarcopenia varied from 8.4% to 27.6% depending on the method of diagnosis used. Regarding muscle mass, BIA systematically overestimated muscle mass compared to DXA (mean estimated prevalence with BIA = 12.8%; mean prevalence with DXA = 21%). For muscle strength, the pneumatic dynamometer diagnosed twice more sarcopenic subjects than the hydraulic dynamometer (mean estimated prevalence with PD = 22.4%; mean estimated prevalence with HD = 11.4%). Finally, no difference in prevalence was observed when the walking speed or the SPPB test was used. A weak overall kappa coefficient was observed (0.53), suggesting that the 8 methods of diagnosis are moderately concordant.Conclusion: Within the same definition of sarcopenia, prevalence of sarcopenia is highly dependent on the diagnostic tools used. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.