Objective: To examine the prevalence of sarcopenia and its association with protein intake in men and women in a multi-ethnic population. Design: We used cross-sectional data from the HELIUS (Healthy Life in an Urban Setting) study, which includes nearly 25,000 participants (aged 18–70 years) of Dutch, South-Asian Surinamese, African Surinamese, Turkish, Moroccan, and Ghanaian ethnic origin. For the current study, we included 5161 individuals aged 55 years and older. Sarcopenia was defined according to the EWGSOP2. In a subsample (N = 1371), protein intake was measured using ethnic-specific Food Frequency Questionnaires. Descriptive analyses were performed to study sarcopenia prevalence across ethnic groups in men and women, and logistic regression analyses were used to study associations between protein intake and sarcopenia. Results: Sarcopenia prevalence was found to be sex- and ethnic-specific, varying from 29.8% in Turkish to 61.3% in South-Asian Surinamese men and ranging from 2.4% in Turkish up to 30.5% in South-Asian Surinamese women. Higher protein intake was associated with a 4% lower odds of sarcopenia in the subsample (OR = 0.96, 95%-CI: 0.92–0.99) and across ethnic groups, being only significant in the South-Asian Surinamese group. Conclusion: Ethnic differences in the prevalence of sarcopenia and its association with protein intake suggest the need to target specific ethnic groups for prevention or treatment of sarcopenia.
DOCUMENT
IMPORTANCE: Sarcopenia and obesity are 2 global concerns associated with adverse health outcomes in older people. Evidence on the population-based prevalence of the combination of sarcopenia with obesity (sarcopenic obesity [SO]) and its association with mortality are still limited.OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia and SO and their association with all-cause mortality.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This large-scale, population-based cohort study assessed participants from the Rotterdam Study from March 1, 2009, to June 1, 2014. Associations of sarcopenia and SO with all-cause mortality were studied using Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazards regression, and accelerated failure time models fitted for sex, age, and body mass index (BMI). Data analysis was performed from January 1 to April 1, 2023.EXPOSURES: The prevalence of sarcopenia and SO, measured based on handgrip strength and body composition (BC) (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry) as recommended by current consensus criteria, with probable sarcopenia defined as having low handgrip strength and confirmed sarcopenia and SO defined as altered BC (high fat percentage and/or low appendicular skeletal muscle index) in addition to low handgrip strength.MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, collected using linked mortality data from general practitioners and the central municipal records, until October 2022.RESULTS: In the total population of 5888 participants (mean [SD] age, 69.5 [9.1] years; mean [SD] BMI, 27.5 [4.3]; 3343 [56.8%] female), 653 (11.1%; 95% CI, 10.3%-11.9%) had probable sarcopenia and 127 (2.2%; 95% CI, 1.8%-2.6%) had confirmed sarcopenia. Sarcopenic obesity with 1 altered component of BC was present in 295 participants (5.0%; 95% CI, 4.4%-5.6%) and with 2 altered components in 44 participants (0.8%; 95% CI, 0.6%-1.0%). An increased risk of all-cause mortality was observed in participants with probable sarcopenia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.14-1.47) and confirmed sarcopenia (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.53-2.43). Participants with SO plus 1 altered component of BC (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.60-2.33]) or 2 altered components of BC (HR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.97-4.11) had a higher risk of mortality than those without SO. Similar results for SO were obtained for participants with a BMI of 27 or greater.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, sarcopenia and SO were found to be prevalent phenotypes in older people and were associated with all-cause mortality. Additional alterations of BC amplified this risk independently of age, sex, and BMI. The use of low muscle strength as a first step of both diagnoses may allow for early identification of individuals at risk for premature mortality.
DOCUMENT
Background: Although diagnosing and treating malnutrition, sarcopenia and underweight are recommended to be embedded and sustained within nutritional care, it is unknown if that is facilitated in geriatric rehabilitation. This study determined the proportion of geriatric rehabilitation inpatients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight receiving dietetic interventions as part of routine clinical care and if these patients have greater improvements in body weight and composition compared to patients not receiving dietetic interventions.Methods: Geriatric rehabilitation inpatients from the observational REStORing health of acutely unwell adulTs (RESORT) cohort were included (n=971, median age 83.2 [77.7-88.8] years, 58.5% (n=568) females). Malnutrition, sarcopenia and underweight were defined by the Global Leadership Initiative of Malnutrition, European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 and age-specific body mass index cut-offs. Data on dietetic interventions initiated by dietitians as part of clinical care was extracted from the centralised hospital database. Changes in body weight (kg), skeletal muscle mass (kg, %), and fat mass (kg, %) from admission to discharge were determined using linear mixed models.Results: Dietetic interventions were received by 306 (62.0%), 138 (71.5%) and 153 (76.9%) of patients with malnutrition (n=493), sarcopenia (n=193) and underweight (n=199). Duration and frequency of dietetic interventions were higher in patients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight compared to patients without those conditions. There were no differences in body weight/composition changes in patients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight receiving dietetic interventions compared to those not receiving interventions.Conclusions: One-third of geriatric rehabilitation inpatients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight are not receiving dietetic interventions and therefore the referral and diagnostic process require improvements. Patients with malnutrition, sarcopenia or underweight receiving dietetic interventions had no greater improvements in body weight/composition compared to those who did not receive interventions. Tailoring dietetic interventions for malnutrition, sarcopenia and underweight diagnosis may improve patient outcomes.
MULTIFILE
