SARC-F for Screening of Sarcopenia Among Older Adults: A Meta-analysis of Screening Test Accuracy

摘要

ObjectiveTo examine the screening ability of SARC-F for older adults using a meta-analysis. DesignMeta-analysis. Setting and ParticipantsThe literature review was conducted using MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, andClinicalTrials.gov. Articles written on and after 1960 that included data regarding the sensitivity and specificity of SARC-F's diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia in older adults were searched. MeasuresThe bivariate random effects model was used to calculate the summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). The summary receiver operating characteristic curve was used to summarize the overall test performance. ResultsSeven studies involving a total of 12,800 subjects met the eligibility criteria of our study. The pooled results of sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and DOR with the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People as the reference standard were 0.21 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.13-0.31], 0.90 (95% CI, 0.83-0.94), 2.16 (95% CI, 1.51-3.09), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.80-0.95), and 2.47 (95% CI, 1.64-3.74), respectively. Overall, we achieved similar pooled results of sensitivity and specificity for studies using the International Working Group on Sarcopenia and Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia as the reference standards. Because few studies used the Foundation National Institute of Health reference standards, a meta-analysis was not performed. Conclusions/ImplicationsAlthough the screening sensitivity performance of SARC-F was poor, its specificity was high; thus, it is an effective tool for selecting subjects who should undergo further testing for confirming a diagnosis of sarcopenia.