首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Sensors (Basel Switzerland) >Comparison of Two Electronic Physical Performance Batteries by Measurement Time and Sarcopenia Classification
【2h】

Comparison of Two Electronic Physical Performance Batteries by Measurement Time and Sarcopenia Classification

机译:通过测量时间和SARCOPENIA分类比较两个电子物理性能电池

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) is a widely accepted test for measuring lower extremity function in older adults. However, there are concerns regarding the examination time required to conduct a complete SPPB consisting of three components (walking speed, chair rise, and standing balance tests) in clinical settings. We aimed to assess specific examination times for each component of the electronic Short Physical Performance Battery (eSPPB) and compare the ability of the original three-component examinations (eSPPB) and a faster, two-component examination without a balance test (electronic Quick Physical Performance Battery, eQPPB) to classify sarcopenia. The study was a retrospective, cross-sectional study which included 124 ambulatory outpatients who underwent physical performance examination at a geriatric clinic of a tertiary, academic hospital in Seoul, Korea, between December 2020 and March 2021. For eSPPB, we used a toolkit containing sensors and software (Dyphi, Daejeon, Korea) developed to measure standing balance, walking speed, and chair rise test results. Component-specific time stamps were used to log the raw data. Duration of balance examination, 5 times sit-to-stand test (5XSST), and walking speed examination were calculated. Sarcopenia was determined using the 2019 Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS) guideline. The median age was 78 years (interquartile range, IQR: 73,82) and 77 subjects (62.1%) were female. The total mean eSPPB test time was 124.8 ± 29.0 s (balance test time 61.8 ± 12.3 s, 49.5%; gait speed test time 34.3 ± 11.9 s, 27.5%; and 5XSST time 28.7 ± 19.1 s, 23.0%). The total mean eQPPB test time was 63.0 ± 25.4 s. Based on the AWGS criteria, 34 (27.4%) patient’s results were consistent with sarcopenia. C-statistics for classifying sarcopenia were 0.83 for eSPPB and 0.85 for eQPPB (p = 0.264), while eQPPB took 49.5% less measurement time compared with eSPPB. Breakdowns of eSPPB test times were identified. Omitting balance tests may reduce test time without significantly affecting the classifying ability of eSPPB for sarcopenia.
机译:短的物理性能电池(SPPB)是一种广泛接受的测试,用于测量老年人的下肢功能。然而,有关于进行临床环境中的三个部件(步行速度,椅子上升和稳定测试)组成的完整SPPB所需的考试时间。我们旨在评估电子短物理性能电池(ESPPB)的每个部件的具体检查时间,并比较原始的三组分检查(ESPPB)和更快,双组分检查的能力,而无需平衡测试(电子快速物理性能电池,EQPPB)分类SARCOPENIA。该研究是一种回顾性的横截面研究,其中包括124名横断面的门诊病,在2020年12月20日和3月2021年间,在韩国首尔的第一个学术医院的一个老年诊所进行了124名诊所。对于ESPPB,我们使用了一个包含的工具包传感器和软件(Dyphi,Dyphi,Daejeon,韩国)开发用于衡量平衡,步行速度和椅子上升测试结果。组件特定的时间戳用于记录原始数据。平衡检查的持续时间,计算静止测试(5XSST)和步行速度检查。使用2019年亚洲工作组为SARCOPENIA(AWGS)指南确定了SARCOPENIA。中位年龄为78岁(中位数,IQR:73,82)和77名受试者(62.1%)是女性。总均值ESPPB测试时间为124.8±29.0 s(平衡测试时间61.8±12.3 s,49.5%;步态速度测试时间34.3±11.9 s,27.5%;和5xsst时间28.7±19.1 s,23.0%)。总体平均值均衡时间为63.0±25.4秒。基于AWGS标准,34(27.4%)患者的结果与SARCOPENIA一致。用于分类SARCOPENIA的C统计值为ESPPB的0.83,EQPPB为0.85(P = 0.264),而EQPPB与ESPPB相比较低的测量时间减少了49.5%。确定了ESPPB测试时间的故障。省略平衡测试可能会降低测试时间,而不会显着影响SARCOPENIA的ESPPB的分类能力。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号