Department of Diabetes and Metabolism, Ise Red Cross Hospital, Ise-shi, Mie, Japan.
Department of Diabetes and Metabolism, Ise Red Cross Hospital, Ise-shi, Mie, Japan.
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018 Aug;19(8):685-689. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2018.04.001. Epub 2018 May 31.
To examine the screening ability of SARC-F for older adults using a meta-analysis.
Meta-analysis.
The literature review was conducted using MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.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.
The 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.
Seven 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/IMPLICATIONS: Although 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.
通过荟萃分析研究 SARC-F 在老年人中的筛查能力。
荟萃分析。
文献综述通过 MEDLINE、Cochrane 系统评价数据库和 ClinicalTrials.gov 进行。检索了 1960 年以后发表的包含 SARC-F 诊断标准对老年人肌少症的诊断准确性的敏感性和特异性数据的文章。
使用双变量随机效应模型计算敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比（PLR）、阴性似然比（NLR）和诊断比值比（DOR）的综合估计值。使用综合受试者工作特征曲线总结总体检验性能。
共有 7 项研究纳入了 12800 名受试者，符合本研究的纳入标准。以欧洲老年人肌少症工作组为参考标准的敏感性、特异性、PLR、NLR 和 DOR 的汇总结果分别为 0.21（95%可信区间[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）和 2.47（95% CI，1.64-3.74）。总体而言，我们在使用国际肌少症工作组和亚洲肌少症工作组作为参考标准的研究中获得了相似的敏感性和特异性汇总结果。由于很少有研究使用国家卫生基金会参考标准，因此未进行荟萃分析。
结论/意义：尽管 SARC-F 的筛查敏感性表现不佳，但特异性较高；因此，它是一种有效的工具，用于选择需要进一步检测以确认肌少症诊断的患者。
