Irina Churilov, Leonid Churilov, Michelle Proctor, Anna Galligan, David Murphy, Mark Westcott, Richard J MacIsaac, Elif I Ekinci
{"title":"The association between SARC-F status and quality of life in High Risk Foot Clinic patients","authors":"Irina Churilov, Leonid Churilov, Michelle Proctor, Anna Galligan, David Murphy, Mark Westcott, Richard J MacIsaac, Elif I Ekinci","doi":"10.17987/jcsm-cr.v4i1.73","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>High Risk Foot Clinic (HRFC) patients have foot ulceration commonly associated with poorer quality of life (QoL). A positive SARC-F test is predictive of sarcopenia. The objective of this study is to investigate whether SARC-F positive status is associated with lower QoL among attendees of HRFC, which is currently unknown.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and results</h3>\n \n <p>In this cross-sectional study ambulatory HRFC patients were recruited at metropolitan tertiary referral hospital over one year. Demographics, comorbidities, SARC-F and EQ-5D-3L (EuroQol Group) outcomes were collected. Association between SARC-F status and EQ-5D visual analogue scale measurement, as well as individual EQ-5D-3L dimensions were investigated using, respectively, linear robust and ordinal logistic regression modelling. The clinic was attended by 122 new patients, 85 of whom (69%) completed the questionnaires with no selection bias identified. 43/85 (51%) patients were SARC-F positive as indicated by a score of 4 or greater. No significant differences between SARC-F positive and negative patients were identified in age or diabetes status. SARC-F positive patients had consistently lower EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale measurement [mean 5.3 (SD 2.0); median 5 (IQR: 4, 6.5)] compared to SARC-F negative patients [6.6 (SD 1.9); 7 (5.5, 7.5)], adjusted mean difference -1.2 (95%CI: -2.1, -0.4; p=0.007). SARC-F positive patients demonstrated consistent and statistically significantly worse EQ-5D-3L scores on mobility, personal care and usual activities, but not on anxiety/depression and pain/discomfort components.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Approximately half of HRFC patients are SARC-F positive and exhibit significantly lower QoL as measured by EQ-5D-3L compared to SARC-F negative patients.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":73543,"journal":{"name":"JCSM clinical reports","volume":"4 1","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.17987/jcsm-cr.v4i1.73","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCSM clinical reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.17987/jcsm-cr.v4i1.73","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Background
High Risk Foot Clinic (HRFC) patients have foot ulceration commonly associated with poorer quality of life (QoL). A positive SARC-F test is predictive of sarcopenia. The objective of this study is to investigate whether SARC-F positive status is associated with lower QoL among attendees of HRFC, which is currently unknown.
Methods and results
In this cross-sectional study ambulatory HRFC patients were recruited at metropolitan tertiary referral hospital over one year. Demographics, comorbidities, SARC-F and EQ-5D-3L (EuroQol Group) outcomes were collected. Association between SARC-F status and EQ-5D visual analogue scale measurement, as well as individual EQ-5D-3L dimensions were investigated using, respectively, linear robust and ordinal logistic regression modelling. The clinic was attended by 122 new patients, 85 of whom (69%) completed the questionnaires with no selection bias identified. 43/85 (51%) patients were SARC-F positive as indicated by a score of 4 or greater. No significant differences between SARC-F positive and negative patients were identified in age or diabetes status. SARC-F positive patients had consistently lower EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale measurement [mean 5.3 (SD 2.0); median 5 (IQR: 4, 6.5)] compared to SARC-F negative patients [6.6 (SD 1.9); 7 (5.5, 7.5)], adjusted mean difference -1.2 (95%CI: -2.1, -0.4; p=0.007). SARC-F positive patients demonstrated consistent and statistically significantly worse EQ-5D-3L scores on mobility, personal care and usual activities, but not on anxiety/depression and pain/discomfort components.
Conclusions
Approximately half of HRFC patients are SARC-F positive and exhibit significantly lower QoL as measured by EQ-5D-3L compared to SARC-F negative patients.