Sarc-F and muscle function in community dwelling adults with aged care service needs: baseline and post-training relationship
Author(s) -
Justin Keogh,
Timothy Henwood,
Paul A. Gardiner,
Anthony Tuckett,
Sharon Hetherington,
Kevin Rouse,
Paul Swinton
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
peerj
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.927
H-Index - 70
ISSN - 2167-8359
DOI - 10.7717/peerj.8140
Subject(s) - sarcopenia , isometric exercise , medicine , analysis of variance , physical therapy , gerontology , physical medicine and rehabilitation
Background This study sought to better understand the psychometric properties of the SARC-F, by examining the baseline and training-related relationships between the five SARC-F items and objective measures of muscle function. Each of the five items of the SARC-F are scored from 0 to 2, with total score of four or more indicative of likely sarcopenia. Methods This manuscript describes a sub-study of a larger step-wedge, randomised controlled 24-week progressive resistance and balance training (PRBT) program trial for Australian community dwelling older adults accessing government supported aged care. Muscle function was assessed using handgrip strength, isometric knee extension, 5-time repeated chair stand and walking speed over 4 m. Associations within and between SARC-F categories and muscle function were assessed using multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and multinomial regression, respectively. Results Significant associations were identified at baseline between SARC-F total score and measures of lower-body muscle function ( r = − 0.62 to 0.57; p ≤ 0.002) in 245 older adults. MCA analysis indicated the first three dimensions of the SARC-F data explained 48.5% of the cumulative variance. The initial dimension represented overall sarcopenia diagnosis, Dimension 2 the ability to displace the body vertically, and Dimension 3 walking ability and falls status. The majority of the 168 older adults who completed the PRBT program reported no change in their SARC-F diagnosis or individual item scores (56.5–79.2%). However, significant associations were obtained between training-related changes in SARC-F total and item scores and changes in walking speed and chair stand test performance ( r = − 0.30 to 0.33; p < 0.001 and relative risk ratio = 0.40–2.24; p < 0.05, respectively). MCA analysis of the change score data indicated that the first two dimensions explained 32.2% of the cumulative variance, with these dimensions representing whether a change occurred and the direction of change, respectively. Discussion The results advance our comprehension of the psychometric properties on the SARC-F, particularly its potential use in assessing changes in muscle function. Older adults’ perception of their baseline and training-related changes in their function, as self-reported by the SARC-F, closely matched objectively measured muscle function tests. This is important as there may be a lack of concordance between self-reported and clinician-measured assessments of older adults’ muscle function. However, the SARC-F has a relative lack of sensitivity to detecting training-related changes, even over a period of 24 weeks. Conclusions Results of this study may provide clinicians and researchers a greater understanding of how they may use the SARC-F and its potential limitations. Future studies may wish to further examine the SARC-F’s sensitivity of change, perhaps by adding a few additional items or an additional category of performance to each item.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom