Abstract
Background The European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) recommends the use of the 5-item SARC-F questionnaire by clinicians to screen for probable sarcopenia. The recommended threshold of ≥4 has low sensitivity and high specificity in identifying probable sarcopenia. While this high threshold is capable of excluding clients without probable sarcopenia, difficulty lies in using this screening tool to identify clients with low muscle strength.
Methods 204 community-dwelling older adults (117 male, 87 female) above the age of 65 were screened at their physician visits using the SARC-F. Probable sarcopenia was diagnosed using gender-specific grip strength criteria defined by the EWGSOP2 (≤ 27 kg for men, ≤ 16 kg for women). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine a SARC-F threshold that optimized the tradeoff between sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of probable sarcopenia.
Results Probable sarcopenia was present in 11.8% of participants. There were no differences in age (73.9 ± 6.2 years) or BMI (29.5 ± 5.8 kg/m2) between genders. Males had greater grip strength (36.3 ± 8.1; 22.4 ± 5.5 kg) and lower SARC-F scores (0.92 ± 1.65, 1.88 ± 2.31) than females. The ROC curve identified a SARC-F score of ≥2 as an optimal cutoff between sensitivity and specificity (AUC = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67 – 0.88, p < .05). Accuracy (0.77), false positive rate (0.22), positive predictive value (0.31), and negative predictive value (0.96) were also calculated.
Conclusions A SARC-F threshold of ≥2 is recommended as an optimal tradeoff between sensitivity and specificity when identifying community-dwelling older adults with probable sarcopenia. This is lower than the currently accepted recommendation of ≥4. Our findings promote the recommended early detection and treatment by medical professionals by the EWGSOP2 by improving the ability to identify individuals with low muscle strength with this screening procedure.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Barton College Institutional Review Board. The proposal, as submitted, has been deemed to meet the basic guidelines and regulations of the federal mandates and the Barton College Institutional Review Board policies.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Correction of the displayed abstract. Correction of corresponding author details.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
