Diagnostic Criteria and Measurement Techniques of Sarcopenia: A Critical Evaluation of the Up-to-Date Evidence

Abstract

Sarcopenia, a geriatric syndrome characterized by progressive skeletal muscle mass and function decline, poses a significant health risk among the elderly, contributing to frailty, falls, hospitalization, loss of independence and mortality. The prevalence of sarcopenia varies significantly based on various factors, such as living status, demographics, measurement techniques and diagnostic criteria. Although the overall prevalence is reported at 10% in individuals aged 60 and above, disparities exist across settings, with higher rates in nursing homes and hospitals. Additionally, the differences in prevalence between Asian and non-Asian countries highlight the impact of cultural and ethnic factors, and variations in diagnostic criteria, cut-off values and assessment methods contribute to the observed heterogeneity in reported rates. This review outlines diverse diagnostic criteria and several measurement techniques supporting decision making in clinical practice. Moreover, it facilitates the selection of appropriate tools to assess sarcopenia, emphasizing its multifactorial nature. Various scientific groups, including the European Working Group of Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP), the International Working Group on Sarcopenia (IWGS), the Asian Working Group on Sarcopenia (AWGS), the American Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) and the Sarcopenia Definition and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC), have published consensus papers outlining diverse definitions of sarcopenia. The choice of diagnostic criteria should be aligned with the specific objectives of the study or clinical practice, considering the characteristics of the study population and available resources.

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Portuguese Version of the SARC-F in Community-Dwelling Older Adults

“…For instance, Liu et al [ 42 ] found that, in Chinese adults ≥ 50 years, the prevalence of sarcopenia according to different operational definitions were 11.8% (EWGSOP2), 18.1% (FNIH), 22.8% (AWGS 2019), 24.1% (IWGS), and 57.1% (EWGSOP1). However, there are other factors such as age group, gender, geographical areas, ethnicities, or locations that may affect the prevalence of sarcopenia [ 43 , 44 ]. A meta-analysis published by Petermann-Rocha et al [ 45 ] described that the prevalence of sarcopenia varied from 10% to 27% in adults aged 60 years and over, where the highest prevalence was found in Oceania (EWGSOP1) and the lowest in Europe (EWGSOP2).…”

The role of different physical function tests for the prediction of fracture risk in older women

“… 32 As the aetiology is multifactorial and the resulting outcomes are often severe and include increased mortality, disability and reduced quality of life, sarcopenia can be defined as a geriatric syndrome, which warrants specific interventions to prevent its associated negative outcomes. 33 , 34 In this study, we have tested the association between different physical function tests, which to some degree reflect the geriatric syndrome, and fracture outcomes to identify a risk that might be reversible.…”