4.4 Article

The Additional Value of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis-Derived Muscle Mass as a Screening Tool in Geriatric Assessment for Fall Prevention

Journal

GERONTOLOGY
Volume 58, Issue 5, Pages 407-412

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000336106

Keywords

Elderly; Sarcopenia; Falls

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The decline in skeletal muscle in old age is a factor in the development of functional limitations. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess if there is a correlation between muscle mass based on bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) detection and the fall incidence in nursing home residents and to examine the risk factors for falling in nursing home residents. Methods: This prospective cohort study was part of a longitudinal study on nutritional issues in 52 nursing homes in Antwerp (Belgium) from October 2007 to April 2008. Two hundred and seventy-six people aged 65 years and older were included. Each subject was assessed with BIA, the timed get-up-and-go test, the Katz score, the Mini Nutritional Assessment - Short Form and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. The primary outcome parameter was fall incidence during the study. Results: The prevalence of sarcopenia varied from 24.3 to 81.5% depending on which definition was used. No association was found between BIA-derived muscle mass and fall incidence. Logistic regression analysis showed that gait speed (odds ratio 1.029; p = 0.003) and mental health (odds ratio 0.981; p = 0.015) are significantly associated with fall incidence in nursing homes. A receiver operating characteristic curve showed that none of the BIA-derived muscle parameters are good predictors of the risk of falling. Conclusions: This study shows that there is no association between sarcopenia based on BIA and fall incidence and that BIA-derived muscle mass has no additional value in predicting fall incidents compared to the timed get-up-and-go test. Copyright (C) 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available