Search

IntroductionOlder individuals are at risk of malnutrition resulting from chronic diseases-related body and muscle mass reduction. In turn, nutritional deficiencies may enhance catabolic processes, leading to accelerated aging and comorbidity, thus creating a vicious cycle. Our study aimed to assess the prevalence of malnutrition using the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and to determine the health correlates of malnutrition in a representative sample of community-dwelling older adults.MethodsWe used the GLIM criteria to diagnose malnutrition in 5,614 participants of the PolSenior2 study. The PolSenior2 study was a population-based survey designed to assess the medical, psychological, social, and economic characteristics of community-dwelling older adults.ResultsMalnutrition was diagnosed in 13.4% of the participants using the GLIM criteria. Results of multiple logistic regression showed that the risk of depression [OR 4.18, pConclusionDue to the high risk of malnutrition, special attention should be paid to individuals in late old age. Suspected malnutrition should also be considered in people at risk of depression, with peptic ulcer disease, past stroke, and cognitive impairment. Chronic pain should also prompt the diagnosis for malnutrition.

IntroductionThere are four screening sarcopenia questionnaires (SARC-F, SARC-CalF, MSRA-5, MSRA-7). To unambiguously determine which of them is the most effective tool in community-dwelling older adults, we performed a diagnostic accuracy study. The aim of the analysis was to assess the diagnostic values of SARC-F, SARC-CalF, MSRA-5, MSRA-7 and compare their psychometric properties against six criterion standards (EWGSOP1, EWGSOP2, FNIH, AWGS, IWGS, SCWD criteria).Materials and methodsWe included 100 community-dwelling volunteers aged ≥ 65yrs. The sensitivity/specificity analyses were performed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the ROC curves (AUC) were calculated to compare the overall diagnostic accuracy of the four questionnaires. Ideal screening tools should have reasonably high sensitivity and specificity, and an AUC value above 0.7.ResultsWith respect to the six criterion standards used, the sensitivity of SARC-F, SARC-CalF, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 ranged 35.0-90.0%, 20.0-75.0%, 64.7-90.0%, 76.5-91.7%, respectively, whereas the specificity ranged 86.9-91.1%, 80.0-90.0%, 45.8-48.8%, 28.9-31.0% respectively. The AUCs of SARC-F, SARC-CalF, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 ranged from 0.655-0.882, 0.711-0.874, 0.618-0.782 and 0.588-0.711 respectively. Only SARC-CalF had AUC >0.7 and ConclusionBased on our analysis, the standard sarcopenia screening questionnaires deliver contradictory results in many practically occurring cases. It appears that SARC-CalF is an optimal choice for screening sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.

IntroductionSARC-F is a quick questionnaire recommended as a screening tool for sarcopenia. The aim of the study was to translate, adapt, and validate the Polish version of the SARC-F for community-dwelling older adults in Poland.Materials and methodsWe included 160 Polish volunteers aged ≥ 60 years (44% of men). The Polish version of SARC-F was adapted following standardized forward-backward translation procedure. SARC-F was validated against the six sets of diagnostic criteria as the reference standards [developed independently by European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People1 (EWGSOP1), European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People2 (EWGSOP2), Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Sarcopenia Project, Asia Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS), the International Working Group for Sarcopenia (IWGS), and Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders (SCWD)].ResultsSARC-F score ≥ 4 points was observed in 18.8% of the study population. Cronbach's alpha was 0.70. The sensitivity of SARC-F varied from 33.3% to 50.0% depending on the diagnostics criteria used, while the specificity was about 85%. Positive predictive value (PPV) was low (about 30%) for five out of six sets of the diagnostic criteria used (EWGSOP2, IWGS, AWGS, FNIH, and SCWD), while the negative predictive value (NPV) was generally high (>88%). The area under the ROC curves (AUC) was 0.652-0.728. SARC-F had the largest AUC against FNIH criteria (0.728), indicating a moderate diagnostic accuracy. Similar results were found for EWGSOP2 and IWGS criteria. The AUC values were below 0.7 for AWGS, SCWD, and EWGSOP1 criteria.ConclusionBased on the results, the Polish version of SARC-F shows excellent reliability and good internal consistency. High specificity and high NPV make SARC-F a useful tool to rule-out sarcopenia with high accuracy in community-dwelling older adults, independently of the diagnostic criteria used.