Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39510782›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Assessment of muscle strength in elderly as a screening method for sarcopenia in primary care: a scoping review.

Matilda Du Rietz, Susanne Beischer

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
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

2 authors.

Matilda Du RietzDistriktsläkarna Kviberg Health Center and Childcare Center, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Susanne BeischerUnit of Physiotherapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden susanne.beischer@gu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9075-5073

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo identify and map the available evidence for whether a test of handgrip strength (HGS) and/or the chair stand test (CST) have been used as screening tools for the detection of sarcopenia in elderly individuals within primary care settings.

designThis study was designed as a scoping review, in accordance with the methodological framework for scoping reviews, developed by Arksey and O'Malley, and using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted to identify relevant articles listed in PubMed and Scopus databases up to 16 October 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies including individuals aged ≥60 years who had undergone assessments of HGS and/or the CST in primary care settings were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Following the article selection process, based on predetermined criteria for inclusion and exclusion, the selected articles were analysed regarding population demographics, the setting in which the research was conducted, the study design, used diagnostic tools and reported results.

resultsThe search yielded 282 unique articles, of which 7 were included in the final analysis. All seven included articles had a cross-sectional study design, whereof one also had a longitudinal 3-year follow-up. The number of participants ranged from 75 to 719. Three of the articles used the diagnostic criteria presented by European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP), two used the criteria by Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019, one used the EWGSOP2 criteria and one applied both the EWGSOP and EWGSOP2 criteria to their data. All the articles used HGS to assess muscle strength. CST was not used for this purpose in any of the articles, although it was used to estimate physical performance or as part of the short physical performance battery. The prevalence of sarcopenia in the included articles was 12.0%-20.7%, while the prevalence of possible sarcopenia was 69.9%-73.3% and that of probable sarcopenia was 25.5%-94%.

conclusionNone of the included articles aimed to study a test of HGS and/or the CST as screening tools for the detection of sarcopenia. However, four of the articles diagnosed possible or probable sarcopenia by using a test of HGS and/or the CST among elderly patients in a primary care setting. There is a need for more research to elucidate whether a test of HGS and/or the CST might be used for screening of sarcopenia in primary care.

Indexed as

Hand StrengthMuscle StrengthPrimary Health CareSarcopeniaAgedGeriatric AssessmentHumansMass ScreeningAgingGERIATRIC MEDICINEPhysical ExaminationPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID39510782
PMCPMC11552589

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.