<p>Comparison of Diagnostic Performance of SARC-F and Its Two Modified Versions (SARC-CalF and SARC-F+EBM) in Community-Dwelling Older Adults from Poland</p>

Abstract

Purpose: Older adults should be routinely screened for sarcopenia, which threatens healthy, independent aging. The most popular screening tool is the SARC-F questionnaire. As its sensitivity is unsatisfactory, two modified versions of the questionnaire have been published: SARC-CalF (including calf circumference as an additional item) and SARC-F+EBM (assessing additionally age and Body Mass Index). The diagnostic performance of the three versions of the questionnaire has not been compared. The analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic value of SARC-F, SARC-CalF, and SARC-F+EBM questionnaires, and to compare their psychometric properties against two reference standards of sarcopenia diagnosis, ie, EWGSOP1 and modified EWGSOP2 criteria. Materials and Methods: We performed the sensitivity/specificity analysis and compared the overall diagnostic accuracy of SARC-F, SARC-CalF (31cm) (cut-off point 31 cm for both genders), SARC-CalF (33/34cm) (cut-off points: 33 cm for women and 34 cm for men), and SARC-F+EBM in 115 community-dwelling volunteers aged ≥ 65 yrs from Poland. Results: Depending on the version of the SARC-F questionnaire used, from 10.4% [SARC-CalF (31cm)] to 33.0% (SARC-F+EBM) were identified as having an increased risk of sarcopenia. Sarcopenia was identified in 17.4% by the EWGSOP1 criteria and in 13.9% by the modified EWGSOP2 criteria. With respect to the two reference standards used, the sensitivity of SARC-F, SARC-CalF (31cm), SARC-CalF (33/34cm), and SARC-F+EBM ranged 30.0--37.5%, 35.0-37.5%, 60.0-62.5%, 55.0% (the same value for both reference standards), respectively. The specificity ranged 85.3-85.9%, 93.9-94.7%, 88.4-86.9%, 70.7-71.6%, respectively. The AUC of SARC-F, SARC-CalF (31cm), SARC-CalF (33/34cm) and SARC-F+EBM ranged 0.644-0.693, 0.737-0.783, 0.767-0.804, 0.714-0.715, respectively. Conclusion:The modified versions of SARC-F have better diagnostic performance as compared to the original questionnaire. Since an ideal screening tool should have reasonably high sensitivity and specificity, and an AUC value above 0.7, the SARC-CalF (33/34cm) seems to be the best screening tool for sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.

Development of a Simple and Practical Screening Tool for Detection of Sarcopenia in Older People: The Bushehr Elderly Health Program

“…Our results indicate that although both SARCFcalf (31 cm) and SARCF-calf (33/34 cm) improve sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of SARC-F, there are sensitivity levels of 19.1% −38.2% and accuracy levels of 0.64-0.73. In line with previous reports (13,40), our findings showed that however, SARCF-Calf has better overall accuracy and sensitivity than SARC-F, but as a screening tool is not perfect. Some studies exist that have developed the models incorporating the use of the anthropometric equation for muscle mass (30,31).…”

“…In contrast, a study reported that SARCF-Calf had no superiority for sensitivity but improved diagnostic accuracy and specificity (39). In our study, two different cut-off points (40,41) used in the screening of sarcopenia; 31 cm for both genders, and 33 cm for women, and 34 cm for men. Our results indicate that although both SARCFcalf (31 cm) and SARCF-calf (33/34 cm) improve sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of SARC-F, there are sensitivity levels of 19.1% −38.2% and accuracy levels of 0.64-0.73.…”

Polish version of SARC-F to assess sarcopenia in older adults: An examination of reliability and validity

“…The cognitive performance was assessed with the Abbreviated Mental Test Score (AMTS). All the tools used in the study have been described in detail in our previous publication [ 27 ].…”

Rastreamento do risco de sarcopenia em adultos com 50 anos ou mais hospitalizados

“…Esse questionário foi o primeiro instrumento utilizado para triagem de sarcopenia e é capaz de predizer prejuízo funcional, hospitalização, qualidade de vida e morte precoce 2,4,5 , além de ser considerado um instrumento eficaz para prever resultados referente à possível recuperação da sarcopenia e promover subsídios e informações para contribuir com as ações terapêuticas precoces 6 . Embora possua alta especificidade, ou seja, diagnostica corretamente os indivíduos sem risco de sarcopenia, sua sensibilidade é baixa, podendo negligenciar o diagnóstico de pessoas com sarcopenia 7,8 . Afim de obter melhores resultados, Barbosa-Silva et al 9 propuseram incorporar ao questionário original a medida da circunferência da panturrilha (CP), com o objetivo de proporcionar uma avaliação mais criteriosa da função muscular e perda de massa magra.…”