...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical Interventions in Aging >Comparison of Diagnostic Performance of SARC-F and Its Two Modified Versions (SARC-CalF and SARC-F+EBM) in Community-Dwelling Older Adults from Poland
【24h】

Comparison of Diagnostic Performance of SARC-F and Its Two Modified Versions (SARC-CalF and SARC-F+EBM) in Community-Dwelling Older Adults from Poland

机译:SARC-F及其两种修改版本(SARC-CALF和SARC-F + EBM)诊断性能的比较来自波兰的社区住宅老年人

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Purpose: Older adults should be routinely screened for sarcopenia, which threatens healthy, independent aging. The most popular screening tool is the SARC-F questionnaire. As its sensitivity is unsatisfactory, two modified versions of the questionnaire have been published: SARC-CalF (including calf circumference as an additional item) and SARC-F+EBM (assessing additionally age and Body Mass Index). The diagnostic performance of the three versions of the questionnaire has not been compared. The analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic value of SARC-F, SARC-CalF, and SARC-F+EBM questionnaires, and to compare their psychometric properties against two reference standards of sarcopenia diagnosis, ie, EWGSOP1 and modified EWGSOP2 criteria. Materials and Methods: We performed the sensitivity/specificity analysis and compared the overall diagnostic accuracy of SARC-F, SARC-CalF (31cm) (cut-off point 31 cm for both genders), SARC-CalF (33/34cm) (cut-off points: 33 cm for women and 34 cm for men), and SARC-F+EBM in 115 community-dwelling volunteers aged ≥ 65?yrs from Poland. Results: Depending on the version of the SARC-F questionnaire used, from 10.4% [SARC-CalF (31cm)] to 33.0% (SARC-F+EBM) were identified as having an increased risk of sarcopenia. Sarcopenia was identified in 17.4% by the EWGSOP1 criteria and in 13.9% by the modified EWGSOP2 criteria. With respect to the two reference standards used, the sensitivity of SARC-F, SARC-CalF (31cm), SARC-CalF (33/34cm), and SARC-F+EBM ranged 30.0– 37.5%, 35.0– 37.5%, 60.0– 62.5%, 55.0% (the same value for both reference standards), respectively. The specificity ranged 85.3– 85.9%, 93.9– 94.7%, 88.4– 86.9%, 70.7– 71.6%, respectively. The AUC of SARC-F, SARC-CalF (31cm), SARC-CalF (33/34cm) and SARC-F+EBM ranged 0.644– 0.693, 0.737– 0.783, 0.767– 0.804, 0.714– 0.715, respectively. Conclusion: The modified versions of SARC-F have better diagnostic performance as compared to the original questionnaire. Since an ideal screening tool should have reasonably high sensitivity and specificity, and an AUC value above 0.7, the SARC-CalF (33/34cm) seems to be the best screening tool for sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.
机译:目的:应常规筛查较老年人的嗜睡,威胁健康,独立的老龄化。最流行的筛选工具是SARC-F问卷。随着其敏感性不满意,调查问卷的两个修改版本已发布:SARC-CALF(包括小牛周长为额外的项目)和SARC-F + EBM(评估年龄和体重指数)。尚未比较这三个版本的问卷的诊断性能。该分析旨在评估SARC-F,SARC-CARF和SARC-F + EBM问卷的诊断价值,并与SARCOPENIA诊断的两种参考标准进行比较他们的心理测量性质,即EWGSOP1和修改的EWGSOP2标准。材料和方法:我们进行了灵敏度/特异性分析,并比较了SARC-F,SARC-CALF(31cm)的整体诊断准确性(两个人的截止点31厘米),SARC-CALF(33/44cm)(切割-off point:男女33厘米,男性34厘米),115名社区住宅志愿者的SARC-F + EBM≥65岁,来自波兰。结果:根据所使用的SARC-F调查问卷的版本,从10.4%[SARC-CALF(31cm)]鉴定为患有SARCOPENIA的风险增加的33.0%(SARC-F + EBM)。通过EWGSOP1标准的17.4%的标准确定了SARCOPENIA,并由修改的EWGSOP2标准中的13.9%。关于所使用的两个参考标准,SARC-F,SARC-CALF(31cm),SARC-CALF(33 / 34CM)和SARC-F + EBM的灵敏度范围为30.0-37.5%,35.0-37.5%,60.0 - 62.5%,55.0%(参考标准的相同值)。特异性范围为85.3-85.9%,93.9- 94.7%,88.4-86.9%,分别为70.7-71.6%。 SARC-F,SARC-CALF(31CM),SARC-CALF(33 / 34CM)和SARC-F + EBM的AUC分别为0.644- 0.693,0.737- 0.783,0.767- 0.804,0.711- 0.715。结论:与原始问卷相比,SARC-F的修改版本具有更好的诊断性能。由于理想的筛选工具应该具有相当高的灵敏度和特异性,并且ACC-CALF(33/34CM)高于0.7的AUC值,似乎是社区住宅老年人康迟腺的最佳筛查工具。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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