Background in 2010, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) published a sarcopenia definition that aimed to foster advances in identifying and caring for people with sarcopenia. In early 2018, the Working Group met again (EWGSOP2) to update the original definition in order to reflect scientific and clinical evidence that has built over the last decade. This paper presents our updated findings. Objectives to increase consistency of research design, clinical diagnoses and ultimately, care for people with sarcopenia. Recommendations sarcopenia is a muscle disease (muscle failure) rooted in adverse muscle changes that accrue across a lifetime; sarcopenia is common among adults of older age but can also occur earlier in life. In this updated consensus paper on sarcopenia, EWGSOP2: (1) focuses on low muscle strength as a key characteristic of sarcopenia, uses detection of low muscle quantity and quality to confirm the sarcopenia diagnosis, and identifies poor physical performance as indicative of severe sarcopenia; (2) updates the clinical algorithm that can be used for sarcopenia case-finding, diagnosis and confirmation, and severity determination and (3) provides clear cut-off points for measurements of variables that identify and characterise sarcopenia. Conclusions EWGSOP2's updated recommendations aim to increase awareness of sarcopenia and its risk. With these new recommendations, EWGSOP2 calls for healthcare professionals who treat patients at risk for sarcopenia to take actions that will promote early detection and treatment. We also encourage more research in the field of sarcopenia in order to prevent or delay adverse health outcomes that incur a heavy burden for patients and healthcare systems.

/pdf/sarcopenia-revised-european-consensus-on-definition-and-4bp7en4cxo.pdf

Sarcopenia: Revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis

Measuring lower body strength is critical in evaluating the functional performance of older adults. The purpose of this study was to assess the test-retest reliability and the criterion-related and construct validity of a 30-s chair stand as a measure of lower body strength in adults over the age of 60 years. Seventy-six community-dwelling older adults (M age = 70.5 years) volunteered to participate in the study, which involved performing two 30-s chair-stand tests and two maximum leg-press tests, each conducted on separate days 2-5 days apart. Test-retest intraclass correlations of .84 for men and .92 for women, utilizing one-way analysis of variance procedures appropriate for a single trial, together with a nonsignificant change in scores from Day 1 testing to Day 2, indicate that the 30-s chair stand has good stability reliability. A moderately high correlation between chair-stand performance and maximum weight-adjusted leg-press performance for both men and women (r = .78 and .71, respectively) supports the criterion-related validity of the chair stand as a measure of lower body strength. Construct (or discriminant) validity of the chair stand was demonstrated by the test's ability to detect differences between various age and physical activity level groups. As expected, chair-stand performance decreased significantly across age groups in decades--from the 60s to the 70s to the 80s (p < .01) and was significantly lower for low-active participants than for high-active participants (p < .0001). It was concluded that the 30-s chair stand provides a reasonably reliable and valid indicator of lower body strength in generally active, community-dwelling older adults.

A 30-s chair-stand test as a measure of lower body strength in community-residing older adults

Background Sit-to-stand (STS) performance is often used as a measure of lower-limb strength in older people and those with significant weakness. However, the findings of recent studies suggest that performance in this test is also influenced by factors associated with balance and mobility. We conducted a study to determine whether sensorimotor, balance, and psychological factors in addition to lower-limb strength predict sit-to-stand performance in older people. Methods Six hundred and sixty nine community-dwelling men and women aged 75-93 years (mean age 78.9, SD = 4.1) underwent quantitative tests of strength, vision, peripheral sensation, reaction time, balance, health status, and sit-to-stand performance. Results Many physiological and psychological factors were significantly associated with sit-to-stand times in univariate analyses. Multiple regression analysis revealed that visual contrast sensitivity, lower limb proprioception, peripheral tactile sensitivity, reaction time involving a foot-press response, sway with eyes open on a foam rubber mat, body weight, and scores on the Short-Form 12 Health Status Questionnaire pain, anxiety, and vitality scales in addition to knee extension, knee flexion, and ankle dorsiflexion strength were significant and independent predictors of STS performance. Of these measures, quadriceps strength had the highest beta weight, indicating it was the most important variable in explaining the variance in STS times. However, the remaining measures accounted for more than half the explained variance in STS times. The final regression model explained 34.9% of the variance in STS times (multiple R =.59). Conclusions The findings indicate that, in community-dwelling older people, STS performance is influenced by multiple physiological and psychological processes and represents a particular transfer skill, rather than a proxy measure of lower limb strength.

/pdf/sit-to-stand-performance-depends-on-sensation-speed-balance-n2k47i941c.pdf

Sit-to-Stand Performance Depends on Sensation, Speed, Balance, and Psychological Status in Addition to Strength in Older People

Regular physical activity helps to improve physical and mental functions as well as reverse some effects of chronic disease to keep older people mobile and independent. Despite the highly publicised benefits of physical activity, the overwhelming majority of older people in the United Kingdom do not meet the minimum physical activity levels needed to maintain health. The sedentary lifestyles that predominate in older age results in premature onset of ill health, disease and frailty. Local authorities have a responsibility to promote physical activity amongst older people, but knowing how to stimulate regular activity at the population-level is challenging. The physiological rationale for physical activity, risks of adverse events, societal and psychological factors are discussed with a view to inform public health initiatives for the relatively healthy older person as well as those with physical frailty. The evidence shows that regular physical activity is safe for healthy and for frail older people and the risks of developing major cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, obesity, falls, cognitive impairments, osteoporosis and muscular weakness are decreased by regularly completing activities ranging from low intensity walking through to more vigorous sports and resistance exercises. Yet, participation in physical activities remains low amongst older adults, particularly those living in less affluent areas. Older people may be encouraged to increase their activities if influenced by clinicians, family or friends, keeping costs low and enjoyment high, facilitating group-based activities and raising self-efficacy for exercise.

/pdf/physical-activity-in-older-age-perspectives-for-healthy-2r0yt8yww7.pdf

Physical activity in older age: perspectives for healthy ageing and frailty.

Importance Limited evidence is available regarding long-term outcomes of opioids compared with nonopioid medications for chronic pain. Objective To compare opioid vs nonopioid medications over 12 months on pain-related function, pain intensity, and adverse effects. Design, Setting, and Participants Pragmatic, 12-month, randomized trial with masked outcome assessment. Patients were recruited from Veterans Affairs primary care clinics from June 2013 through December 2015; follow-up was completed December 2016. Eligible patients had moderate to severe chronic back pain or hip or knee osteoarthritis pain despite analgesic use. Of 265 patients enrolled, 25 withdrew prior to randomization and 240 were randomized. Interventions Both interventions (opioid and nonopioid medication therapy) followed a treat-to-target strategy aiming for improved pain and function. Each intervention had its own prescribing strategy that included multiple medication options in 3 steps. In the opioid group, the first step was immediate-release morphine, oxycodone, or hydrocodone/acetaminophen. For the nonopioid group, the first step was acetaminophen (paracetamol) or a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. Medications were changed, added, or adjusted within the assigned treatment group according to individual patient response. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was pain-related function (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI] interference scale) over 12 months and the main secondary outcome was pain intensity (BPI severity scale). For both BPI scales (range, 0-10; higher scores = worse function or pain intensity), a 1-point improvement was clinically important. The primary adverse outcome was medication-related symptoms (patient-reported checklist; range, 0-19). Results Among 240 randomized patients (mean age, 58.3 years; women, 32 [13.0%]), 234 (97.5%) completed the trial. Groups did not significantly differ on pain-related function over 12 months (overallP = .58); mean 12-month BPI interference was 3.4 for the opioid group and 3.3 for the nonopioid group (difference, 0.1 [95% CI, −0.5 to 0.7]). Pain intensity was significantly better in the nonopioid group over 12 months (overallP = .03); mean 12-month BPI severity was 4.0 for the opioid group and 3.5 for the nonopioid group (difference, 0.5 [95% CI, 0.0 to 1.0]). Adverse medication-related symptoms were significantly more common in the opioid group over 12 months (overallP = .03); mean medication-related symptoms at 12 months were 1.8 in the opioid group and 0.9 in the nonopioid group (difference, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.3 to 1.5]). Conclusions and Relevance Treatment with opioids was not superior to treatment with nonopioid medications for improving pain-related function over 12 months. Results do not support initiation of opioid therapy for moderate to severe chronic back pain or hip or knee osteoarthritis pain. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT01583985

/pdf/effect-of-opioid-vs-nonopioid-medications-on-pain-related-34za8s3rhb.pdf

Effect of Opioid vs Nonopioid Medications on Pain-Related Function in Patients With Chronic Back Pain or Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis Pain: The SPACE Randomized Clinical Trial

W. C. Beam

Papers

A 30-s chair-stand test as a measure of lower body strength in community-residing older adults

Testing versus training effects on irm strength assessment in older adults909