Suppr超能文献

五种肌肉减少症筛查方法的性能比较。

Comparison of the performance of five screening methods for sarcopenia.

作者信息

Locquet Médéa, Beaudart Charlotte, Reginster Jean-Yves, Petermans Jean, Bruyère Olivier

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging, University of Liège.

Geriatric Department, CHU of Liège, Liège, Belgium.

出版信息

Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Dec 29;10:71-82. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S148638. eCollection 2018.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Sarcopenia leads to serious adverse health consequences. There is a dearth of screening tools for this condition, and performances of these instruments have rarely been evaluated. Our aim was to compare the performance of five screening tools for identifying elders at risk of sarcopenia against five diagnostic definitions.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We gathered cross-sectional data of elders from the SarcoPhAge ("Sarco"penia and "Ph"ysical Impairment with Advancing "Age") study. Lean mass was measured with X-ray absorptiometry, muscle strength with a dynamometer and physical performance with the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) test. Performances of screening methods were described using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and area under the curve (AUC), according to five diagnostic definitions of sarcopenia. For each screening tool, optimal cutoff points were computed using two methods.

RESULTS

A total of 306 subjects (74.8±5.9 years, 59.5% women) were included. The prevalence of sarcopenia varied from 5.7% to 16.7% depending on the definition. The best sensitivity (up to 100%) and the best NPV (up to 99.1%) were obtained with the screening test of Ishii et al, regardless of the definition applied. The highest AUC (up to 0.914) was also demonstrated by the instrument of Ishii et al. The most specific tool was the algorithm of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP; up to 91.1%). All NPVs were above 87.0%, and all PPVs were below 51.0%. New cutoffs related to each screening instrument were also proposed to better discriminate sarcopenic individuals from non-sarcopenic individuals.

CONCLUSION

Screening instruments for sarcopenia can be relevantly used in clinical practice to make sure to identify individuals who do not suffer from the syndrome. The screening test of Ishii et al showed better properties in terms of distinguishing those at risk of sarcopenia from those who were not at risk.

摘要

背景

肌肉减少症会导致严重的不良健康后果。目前针对这种病症的筛查工具匮乏,且这些工具的性能很少得到评估。我们的目的是比较五种用于识别有肌肉减少症风险老年人的筛查工具相对于五种诊断定义的性能。

受试者与方法

我们收集了来自SarcoPhAge(“肌肉减少症”与“随着年龄增长身体机能受损”)研究的老年人横断面数据。通过双能X线吸收法测量瘦体重,用测力计测量肌肉力量,并用简短体能状况量表(SPPB)测试身体机能。根据肌肉减少症的五种诊断定义,使用灵敏度、特异度、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)和曲线下面积(AUC)来描述筛查方法的性能。对于每种筛查工具,使用两种方法计算最佳截断点。

结果

共纳入306名受试者(年龄74.8±5.9岁,59.5%为女性)。根据定义,肌肉减少症的患病率在5.7%至16.7%之间。无论采用何种定义,石井等人的筛查测试均获得了最佳灵敏度(高达100%)和最佳NPV(高达99.1%)。石井等人的工具也显示出最高的AUC(高达0.914)。最具特异性的工具是老年人肌肉减少症欧洲工作组(EWGSOP)的算法(高达91.1%)。所有NPV均高于87.0%,所有PPV均低于51.0%。还提出了与每种筛查工具相关的新截断点,以更好地区分肌肉减少症患者和非肌肉减少症患者。

结论

肌肉减少症的筛查工具可在临床实践中合理使用,以确保识别出未患该综合征的个体。石井等人的筛查测试在区分有肌肉减少症风险的人和无风险的人方面表现出更好的性能。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验