Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36413590›Full record

Observational studyAge and ageing2022

Handgrip strength rather than chair stand test should be used to diagnose sarcopenia in geriatric rehabilitation inpatients: REStORing health of acutely unwell adulTs (RESORT).

Laure M G Verstraeten, Nina J de Haan, Eline Verbeet, Janneke P van Wijngaarden, Carel G M Meskers, Andrea B Maier

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Age and ageing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Gripwise Versus Jamar: The Challenge of a New Dynamometer Assessing Handgrip Strength.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2023
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. The sarcopenia-pain connection: why mechanisms matter for patient care?Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Sarcopenia.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Laure M G VerstraetenDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam 1081BT, The Netherlands.
Nina J de HaanDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam 1081BT, The Netherlands.
Eline VerbeetDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam 1081BT, The Netherlands.
Janneke P van WijngaardenDanone Nutricia Research, Uppsalalaan 12, Utrecht 3584 CT, The Netherlands.
Carel G M MeskersDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam 1081HZ, The Netherlands.
Andrea B MaierDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam 1081BT, The Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLDanone Nutricia Research (Netherlands)Parks Victoria · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundaccording to the revised sarcopenia definition proposed by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) and revised definition of the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS2019), handgrip strength (HGS) and chair stand test (CST) can be used interchangeably as initial diagnostic measures.

objectiveto assess the agreement between sarcopenia prevalence, using either HGS or CST, and their association with adverse outcomes in geriatric rehabilitation inpatients.

methodsREStORing health of acutely unwell adulTs is an observational, longitudinal cohort of geriatric rehabilitation inpatients. Cohen's kappa (κ) was used to assess the agreement between sarcopenia prevalence (no, probable and confirmed and severe sarcopenia) according to EWGSOP2 and AWGS2019 using either HGS or CST. Associations between HGS and CST and readmission, institutionalisation and mortality were assessed by binomial regression.

resultspatients (n = 1,250, 57% females) had a median age of 83.1 years (interquartile range: [77.5-88.3]). There was no agreement between probable sarcopenia prevalence using HGS or CST for EWGSOP2 and AWGS2019, respectively (HGS: 70.9% and 76.2%; CST: 95.5% and 98.4%; κ = 0.08 and 0.02). Agreement between confirmed and severe sarcopenia prevalence using either HGS or CST was strong to almost perfect. HGS was associated with 3-month institutionalisation and 3-month and 1-year mortality, whereas CST was not associated.

conclusionsHGS and CST cannot be used interchangeably as diagnostic measures for probable sarcopenia in geriatric rehabilitation inpatients. CST is not useful to predict adverse outcomes in geriatric rehabilitation inpatients.

Indexed as

SarcopeniaAbsorptiometry, PhotonAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHand StrengthHumansInpatientsMalePrevalenceageddiagnosismuscle strengtholder peoplerehabilitationsarcopenia

Identifiers

PMID36413590
PMCPMC9681126
OpenAlexW4309669918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.