The association between SARC-F status and quality of life in High Risk Foot Clinic patients

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,&nbsp;Leonid Churilov,&nbsp;Michelle Proctor,&nbsp;Anna Galligan,&nbsp;David Murphy,&nbsp;Mark Westcott,&nbsp;Richard J MacIsaac,&nbsp;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.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高危足患者SARC-F状态与生活质量的关系
背景:高风险足部门诊(HRFC)患者的足部溃疡通常与较差的生活质量(QoL)相关。SARC-F检测阳性可预测肌肉减少症。本研究的目的是调查SARC-F阳性状态是否与HRFC参与者较低的生活质量相关,目前尚不清楚。方法和结果在这项横断面研究中,在大城市三级转诊医院招募了一年以上的HRFC门诊患者。收集人口统计学、合并症、SARC-F和EQ-5D-3L (EuroQol组)结果。采用线性稳健和有序逻辑回归模型分别研究了SARC-F状态与EQ-5D视觉模拟量表测量以及EQ-5D- 3l个体维度之间的关系。122名新患者参加了该诊所,其中85名(69%)完成了问卷调查,没有发现选择偏差。43/85(51%)患者为SARC-F阳性,评分为4分或更高。SARC-F阳性和阴性患者在年龄或糖尿病状态方面无显著差异。SARC-F阳性患者的EQ-5D-3L视觉模拟量表测量值持续较低[平均5.3 (SD 2.0);中位数为5 (IQR: 4,6.5)],而SARC-F阴性患者为6.6 (SD 1.9);7(5.5, 7.5)],调整后平均差-1.2 (95%CI: -2.1, -0.4;p = 0.007)。SARC-F阳性患者在活动能力、个人护理和日常活动方面的EQ-5D-3L评分一致且在统计学上显著较差,但在焦虑/抑郁和疼痛/不适方面没有表现出来。结论:大约一半的HRFC患者为SARC-F阳性,EQ-5D-3L测量的生活质量明显低于SARC-F阴性患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Predictive influence of artificial intelligence-based body composition analysis in trauma patients with pelvic injuries Issue Information A review of radiological definitions of sarcopenia in cancer The impact of low muscle mass on prognosis following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1