Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; : 105146, 2024 Jul 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39002555

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Intrinsic capacity (IC) and frailty are complementary constructs that encapsulate functional capacities of older adults. Although earlier studies suggest the utility of composite IC scores in predicting risk of frailty, key gaps remain with the lack of direct comparative studies between different IC scales and lack of a composite score based on the World Health Organization Integrated Care for Older People (ICOPE) tool. We aimed to compare different IC scales, including an ICOPE-based scale, in their predictive ability for risk of frailty at 2 years in healthy community-dwelling older adults. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 230 participants (age: 67.2 ± 7.4 years) from the GeriLABS-2 cohort study. METHODS: We derived composite scores by summing 4 IC domains (locomotion, cognition, vitality, and psychological). We compared composite scores of 4 scales: IC1-Chew 2021, range: 0-8; IC2-Liu 2021, range: 0-4; IC3-ICOPE, range: 0-4; IC4-modified ICOPE, range: 0-8. The primary outcome was risk of frailty using the modified Fried Frailty Phenotype. We performed logistic regression to examine the association of baseline composite IC with risk of frailty. We also examined the impact of individual domains and number of impaired domains on risk of frailty. RESULTS: Among 193 (83.9%) older adults who completed 2-year follow-up, 20 (10.4%) met criteria for risk of frailty. When adjusted for covariates, 2-point per domain scales (IC1/IC4) predicted increased risk of frailty (OR, 4.31; 95% CI, 1.55-11.96; OR, 5.00; 95% CI, 1.75-14.26). When further adjusted for baseline frailty, only IC4 remained significant (OR, 4.28; 95% CI, 1.45-12.60). Among the domains, impaired locomotion and vitality were associated with risk of frailty. Greater number of impaired domains predicted increased risk of frailty (IC1/IC2: ß = 0.18-0.19, P < .05). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Baseline composite IC score using 2-point per domain scales better predicted risk of frailty at 2 years, predicated on impaired locomotion/vitality and greater number of impaired domains. For early identification of healthy older adults at risk of frailty, an ICOPE-based scale should be considered, as it is effective and accessible.

2.
Geriatr Gerontol Int ; 24 Suppl 1: 182-188, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38095277

ABSTRACT

AIM: SARC-F is limited by low sensitivity for sarcopenia identification. As surrogates of muscle mass, mid-arm circumference (MAC) and/or calf circumference have been proposed as additions to SARC-F to enhance sarcopenia identification. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of SARC-F, SARC-CalF, SARC-F + MAC, and SARC-CalF + MAC in sarcopenia detection, and to assess the impact of obesity on their diagnostic performance. METHODS: We studied 230 healthy non-frail community-dwelling older adults age >50 years. We performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for SARC-F, SARC-CalF, SARC-F + MAC and SARC-CalF + MAC against sarcopenia diagnosed by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS) 2019 as the reference standard. Obesity was defined by high waist circumference (men ≥90 cm, women ≥80 cm). We performed subgroup analysis to compare between obese and non-obese groups. RESULTS: The prevalence of sarcopenia was 27.0% by AWGS 2019. SARC-CalF + MAC had the best diagnostic performance (area under the curve [AUC] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.81; sensitivity 66.1%; specificity 69.1%), followed by SARC-CalF (AUC 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.78; sensitivity 21.0%; specificity 95.8%). SARC-F (AUC 0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.66; sensitivity 0%; specificity 100%) performed significantly worsethan its modified versions (P < 0.05). There was higher accuracy of sarcopenia identification in obese compared with non-obese groups for SARC-F + MAC (AUC 0.75, 95% CI 0.65-0.85 vs. 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.70) and SARC-CalF + MAC (AUC 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.85 vs. 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of arm circumference to SARC-CalF confers better diagnostic accuracy for sarcopenia identification, especially in the obese group. Thus, MAC may complement SARC-CalF for community screening of sarcopenia amongst healthy community-dwelling older adults by increasing sensitivity for the detection of sarcopenic obesity. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; 24: 182-188.


Subject(s)
Sarcopenia , Male , Humans , Female , Aged , Sarcopenia/diagnosis , Sarcopenia/epidemiology , Mass Screening , ROC Curve , Leg , Geriatric Assessment , Obesity/complications , Obesity/diagnosis , Obesity/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
Ann Geriatr Med Res ; 26(2): 125-133, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35399043

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) is a well-established functional assessment tool used for the screening and assessment of frailty and sarcopenia. However, the SPPB requires trained staff experienced in conducting the standardized protocol, which may limit its widespread use in clinical settings. The automated SPPB (eSPPB) was developed to address this potential barrier; however, its validity among frail older adults remains to be established. Therefore, this exploratory study compared the eSPPB and manual SPPB in patients attending a tertiary fall clinic in relation to their construct validity, reliability, and agreement. METHODS: We studied 37 community-dwelling older adults (mean age, 78.5±6.8 years; mean FRAIL score, 1.2±1.0; 65% pre-frail) attending a tertiary falls clinic. The participants used the mSPPB and eSPPB simultaneously. We evaluated the convergent validity, discriminatory ability, reliability, and agreement using partial correlation adjusted for age and sex, an SPPB cutoff of ≤8 to denote sarcopenia, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and Bland-Altman plots, respectively. RESULTS: The eSPPB showed strong correlations with the mSPPB (r=0.933, p<0.01) and Berg Balance Scale (r=0.869, p<0.01), good discriminatory ability for frailty and balance, and good to excellent reliability (ICC=0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.97). The Bland-Altman plots indicated good agreement with the mSPPB (mean difference, -0.2; 95% confidence interval, -3.2-2.9) without evidence of systematic or proportional biases. CONCLUSION: The results of our exploratory study corroborated the construct validity, reliability, and agreement of the eSPPB with the mSPPB in a small sample of predominantly pre-frail older adults with increased fall risk. Future studies should examine the scalability and feasibility of the widespread use of the eSPPB for frailty and sarcopenia assessment.

5.
Ann Geriatr Med Res ; 25(3): 210-216, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34510882

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While sarcopenia and frailty independently contribute to functional impairment and disability, the combined impact resulting from their interplay is unclear. We investigated if functional, physical, cognitive, and nutritional measures were more adversely affected in community-dwelling older adults who were screened positive for both frailty and sarcopenia. METHODS: Using the FRAIL (≥1) and SARC-F (Strength, Assistance with walking, Rising from a chair, Climbing stairs, and Falls) (≥1) scales for screening, we categorized 200 participants (age, 67.9±7.9 years) as combined (both positive, 12.5%), intermediate (either positive, 25.5%), or robust (both negative, 62%). RESULTS: Comparisons of the three groups showed that the combined group had significantly worse functional ability (Frenchay Activities Index and Modified Barthel Index), physical performance (knee extension, gait speed, and Short Physical Performance Battery score), cognition/mood (Chinese Mini-Mental State Examination [CMMSE] score and Geriatric Depression Scale), and nutrition (Mini Nutritional Assessment [MNA] score) (p<0.05, one-way analysis of variance). Post-hoc comparisons revealed similar findings between the combined and robust groups, except for knee extension and CMMSE scores. Only MNA scores were significantly lower between the intermediate and robust groups. CONCLUSION: Functional ability, physical performance, and nutrition were more adversely affected in our study population of community-dwelling older adults who screened positive for both frailty and sarcopenia than in those who screened positive for either or neither, supporting the use of community screening for early detection and intervention for both frailty and sarcopenia as opposed to either alone.

6.
Nutrients ; 12(10)2020 Sep 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32992541

ABSTRACT

Osteosarcopenia is associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes such as falls and fractures. Its association with frailty is less well-described, particularly in independent community-dwelling older adults. Although nutrition plays a crucial role in maintaining bone and muscle health, the complex relationship between osteosarcopenia and nutrition in the pathogenesis of frailty remains to be elucidated. In this cross-sectional analysis of 230 independent, community-dwelling individuals (mean age 67.2 ± 7.4 years), we examined the associations between osteosarcopenia with nutritional status and frailty, and the mediating role of nutrition in the association between osteosarcopenia and frailty. Osteosarcopenia was defined as fulfilling both the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 consensus definition (low relative appendicular skeletal muscle mass adjusted for height, in the presence of either of either low handgrip strength or slow gait speed) and T-score ≤ -2.5 SD on bone mineral densitometry. We assessed frailty using the modified Fried criteria and nutrition using the Mini-Nutritional Assessment. We performed multiple linear regression, followed by pathway analysis to ascertain whether nutrition mediates the relationship between osteosarcopenia and frailty. Our study population comprised: 27 (11.7%) osteosarcopenic, 35 (15.2%) sarcopenic, 36 (15.7%) osteoporotic and 132 (57.4%) normal (neither osteosarcopenic, sarcopenic nor osteoporotic). Osteosarcopenia (ß = 1.1, 95% CI 0.86-1.4) and sarcopenia (ß = 1.1, 95% CI 0.90-1.4) were significantly associated with frailty, but not osteoporosis. Nutrition mediated the association between osteosarcopenia and frailty (indirect effect estimate 0.09, bootstrap 95% CI 0.01-0.22). In conclusion, osteosarcopenia is associated with frailty and poorer nutritional status, with nutrition mediating the association between osteosarcopenia and frailty. Our findings support early nutritional assessment and intervention in osteosarcopenia to mitigate the risk of frailty.


Subject(s)
Frailty/complications , Nutritional Status , Osteoporosis/complications , Sarcopenia/complications , Accidental Falls , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Fractures, Bone/etiology , Hand Strength , Humans , Independent Living , Male , Middle Aged , Osteoporosis/epidemiology , Sarcopenia/epidemiology
7.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32545853

ABSTRACT

Notwithstanding the increasing body of evidence that links social determinants to health outcomes, social frailty is arguably the least explored among the various dimensions of frailty. Using available items from previous studies to derive a social frailty scale as guided by the Bunt social frailty theoretical framework, we aimed to examine the association of social frailty, independently of physical frailty, with salient outcomes of mood, nutrition, physical performance, physical activity, and life-space mobility. We studied 229 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 67.22 years; 72.6% females) who were non-frail (defined by the FRAIL criteria). Using exploratory factor analysis, the resultant 8-item Social Frailty Scale (SFS-8) yielded a three-factor structure comprising social resources, social activities and financial resource, and social need fulfilment (score range: 0-8 points). Social non-frailty (SNF), social pre-frailty (SPF), and social frailty (SF) were defined based on optimal cutoffs, with corresponding prevalence of 63.8%, 28.8%, and 7.4%, respectively. In logistic regression adjusted for significant covariates and physical frailty (Modified Fried criteria), there is an association of SPF with poor physical performance and low physical activity (odds ratio, OR range: 3.10 to 6.22), and SF with depressive symptoms, malnutrition risk, poor physical performance, and low physical activity (OR range: 3.58 to 13.97) compared to SNF. There was no significant association of SPF or SF with life-space mobility. In summary, through a theory-guided approach, our study demonstrates the independent association of social frailty with a comprehensive range of intermediary health outcomes in more robust older adults. A holistic preventative approach to frailty should include upstream interventions that target social frailty to address social gradient and inequalities.


Subject(s)
Exercise , Frailty , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Frail Elderly , Geriatric Assessment , Humans , Independent Living , Male , Middle Aged , Physical Functional Performance
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...