| Title |
Prevalence of sarcopenia and 9-year mortality in nursing home residents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40520-018-1038-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stany Perkisas, Anne-Marie De Cock, Maurits Vandewoude, Veronique Verhoeven |
| Abstract |
Sarcopenia is a progressive loss of muscle mass, strength, and function. It is linked to functional decline, and secondary to this, to nursing home admission. To look into the prevalence of sarcopenia in a nursing home population and to gain insight into the relation of sarcopenia with mortality in this cohort. A longitudinal cohort follow-up started in October 2007 in 52 nursing homes in Belgium. Following data were procured: anthropometrics (weight/length), body composition (muscle mass through bio-impedance absorptiometry, BIA), functional status (Katz), nutritional status (mini-nutritional assessment-short form, MNA), and a number of laboratory parameters. In total, 745 residents were included. Mean age was 84.6 ± 7.2 years. Mean follow-up time was 1632 ± 1026 days. In total, 17% had severe sarcopenia, 45% had moderate sarcopenia, and 38% had no sarcopenia. Following items were significant (p < 0.05) on univariate analysis with mortality as outcome: sarcopenia, gender, BMI, skeletal muscle mass, age, MNA, and functional level. In multivariate analysis, only MNA, skeletal muscle mass, and age were still significant. Odds ratio for skeletal muscle mass was 1.171 for the highest percentile group, 2.277 for the middle percentile group, and 4.842 for the lowest percentile group. The prevalence of sarcopenia was higher than in comparative literature, for which there are a few hypotheses. Cut-off values for sarcopenia using BIA for specific cohorts need to be re-evaluated. It seems to remain useful to screen for muscle mass in institutionalized elderly, because there is a clear and significant correlation with long-term mortality. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 3 | 20% |
| Canada | 3 | 20% |
| Spain | 2 | 13% |
| South Africa | 1 | 7% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 8 | 53% |
| Members of the public | 7 | 47% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 80 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 4% |
| Researcher | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 44 | 55% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 44 | 55% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2019.
All research outputs
#4,708,457
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#368
of 1,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,390
of 348,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#4
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,868 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.