Standard error of measurement and smallest detectable change of the SarQoL questionnaire: an analysis of subjects from 9 validation studies

ObjectivesThe Sarcopenia Quality of Life (SarQoL) questionnaire, a sarcopenia-specific patient-reported outcome measure, evaluates quality of life with 55 items. It produces 7 domain scores and 1 overall quality of life score, all between 0 and 100 points. This study aims to contribute to the interpretation of the SarQoL scores by calculating the standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC) in a sample of subjects from 9 studies.MethodsSubjects from 9 studies (conducted in Belgium, Brazil, Czech Republic, England, Greece, Lithuania, Poland and Spain) were included. The SEM, a measure of the error in the scores that is not due to true changes, was calculated by dividing the standard deviation of the difference between test and retest scores (SDdiff) by √2. The SDC, defined as change beyond measurement error, was calculated by multiplying SDdiff by 1.96. Bland-Altman plots were assessed for the presence of systematic errors.ResultsA total of 278 sarcopenic subjects, aged 77.67 ± 7.64 years and 61.5% women, were included. The SEM for the overall SarQoL score ranged from 0.18 to 4.20 points for the individual studies, and was 2.65 points when all subjects were analyzed together. The SDC for the overall score ranged from 0.49 to 11.65 points for the individual studies, and was 7.35 points for all subjects. The Bland-Altman plots revealed no systematic errors in the questionnaire.ConclusionThis study shows that, for individual subjects, a change in overall quality of life of at least 7.35 points (on a scale from 0 to 100) would have to be observed to confirm that a true change, beyond measurement error, has occurred. It also demonstrated that the SarQoL questionnaire is a precise instrument, with the observed scores within less than 3 points of the theoretical “true score”.<br/

Measuring health-related quality of life in sarcopenia: summary of the SarQoL psychometric properties

Patient perspectives are now widely recognized as a key element in the evaluation of health interventions. Therefore, the provision of specific and validated Patient Reported Outcome Measures that emphasize the lived experience of patients suffering from specific diseases is very important. In the field of sarcopenia, the only validated specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument available is the Sarcopenia Quality of Life questionnaire (SarQoL). This self-administrated HRQoL questionnaire, developed in 2015, consists of 55 items arranged into 22 questions and has currently been translated into 35 languages. Nineteen validation studies performed on SarQoL have consensually confirmed the capacity of SarQoL to detect difference in HRQoL between older people with and without sarcopenia, its reliability and its validity. Two further observational studies have also indicated its responsiveness to change. A short form SarQoL, including only 14 items has further been developed and validated to reduce the potential burden of administration. Research on the psychometric properties of SarQoL questionnaire is still encouraged as the responsiveness to change of SarQoL has not yet been measured in the context of interventional studies, as limited prospective data currently exist and as there is still not cut-off score to define a low HRQoL. In addition, SarQoL has mainly been used in community-dwelling older individuals with sarcopenia and would benefit to be studied in other types of populations. This review aims to provide to researchers, clinicians, regulators, pharmaceutical industries and other stakeholders a clear summary of comprehensive evidence on the SarQoL questionnaire published up to January 2023Query

Measuring health-related quality of life in sarcopenia: summary of the SarQoL psychometric properties.

peer reviewedPatient perspectives are now widely recognized as a key element in the evaluation of health interventions. Therefore, the provision of specific and validated Patient Reported Outcome Measures that emphasize the lived experience of patients suffering from specific diseases is very important. In the field of sarcopenia, the only validated specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument available is the Sarcopenia Quality of Life questionnaire (SarQoL). This self-administrated HRQoL questionnaire, developed in 2015, consists of 55 items arranged into 22 questions and has currently been translated into 35 languages. Nineteen validation studies performed on SarQoL have consensually confirmed the capacity of SarQoL to detect difference in HRQoL between older people with and without sarcopenia, its reliability and its validity. Two further observational studies have also indicated its responsiveness to change. A short form SarQoL, including only 14 items has further been developed and validated to reduce the potential burden of administration. Research on the psychometric properties of SarQoL questionnaire is still encouraged as the responsiveness to change of SarQoL has not yet been measured in the context of interventional studies, as limited prospective data currently exist and as there is still not cut-off score to define a low HRQoL. In addition, SarQoL has mainly been used in community-dwelling older individuals with sarcopenia and would benefit to be studied in other types of populations. This review aims to provide to researchers, clinicians, regulators, pharmaceutical industries and other stakeholders a clear summary of comprehensive evidence on the SarQoL questionnaire published up to January 2023Query

Deprescribing practices, habits and attitudes of geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training across Europe: a large web-based survey

Purpose To provide an overview of the current deprescribing attitudes, practices, and approaches of geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training across Europe. Methods An online survey was disseminated among European geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training. The survey comprised Likert scale and multiple-choice questions on deprescribing approaches and practices, deprescribing education and knowledge, and facilitators/barriers of deprescribing. Responses to the survey questions and participant characteristics were quantified and differences evaluated between geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training and between European regions. Results The 964 respondents (median age 42 years old; 64% female; 21% geriatricians-in-training) were generally willing to deprescribe (98%) and felt confident about deprescribing (85%). Despite differences across European regions, the most commonly reported reasons for deprescribing were functional impairment and occurrence of adverse drug reactions. The most important barriers for deprescribing were patients' unwillingness, fear of negative consequences, lack of time, and poor communication between multiple prescribers. Perceived risk of adverse drug reactions was highest for psychotropic drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, cardiovascular drugs, and opioid analgesics. Only one in four respondents (23% of geriatricians and 37% of geriatricians-in-training) think education in medical school had sufficiently prepared them for deprescribing in clinical practice. They reported that their future deprescribing activities would probably increase with improved information sharing between various prescribers, deprescribing recommendations in guidelines, and increased education and training. Approximately 90% think that a paradigm shift is required for prescribers and patients, increasing focus on the possible benefits of deprescribing (potentially) inappropriate medications. Conclusions Based on the outcomes of this survey, we recommend investing in improved inter-professional communication, better education and evidence-based recommendations to improve future patient-centered deprescribing practices

Using the Multidimensional Prognostic Index to Predict Clinical Outcomes of Hospitalized Older Persons: A Prospective, Multicenter, International Study

Background: Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) is useful as a prognostic tool in hospitalized older patients, but our knowledge is derived from retrospective studies. We therefore aimed to evaluate in a multicenter, longitudinal, cohort study whether the MPI at hospital admission is useful to identify groups with different mortality risk and whether MPI at discharge may predict institutionalization, rehospitalization, and use of home care services during 12 months. Methods: This longitudinal study, carried out between February 2015 and August 2017, included nine public hospitals in Europe and Australia. A standardized comprehensive geriatric assessment including information on functional, nutritional, cognitive status, risk of pressure sores, comorbidities, medications, and cohabitation status was used to calculate the MPI and to categorize participants in low, moderate, and severe risk of mortality. Data regarding mortality, institutionalization, rehospitalization, and use of home care services were recorded through administrative information. Results: Altogether, 1,140 hospitalized patients (mean age 84.1 years, women = 60.8%) were included. In the multivariable analysis, compared to patients with low risk group at admission, patients in moderate (odds ratio [OR] = 3.32; 95% CI: 1.79-6.17; p <.001) and severe risk (OR = 10.72, 95% CI: 5.70-20.18, p <.0001) groups were at higher risk of overall mortality. Among the 984 older patients with follow-up data available, those in the severe-risk group experienced a higher risk of overall mortality, institutionalization, rehospitalization, and access to home care services. Conclusions: In this cohort of hospitalized older adults, higher MPI values are associated with higher mortality and other negative outcomes. Multidimensional assessment of older people admitted to hospital may facilitate appropriate clinical and postdischarge management

Corrigendum to : prevention of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized older patients with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy : the SENATOR* randomized controlled clinical trial

When this paper was first published, there were errors in Figure 1 and Table 3. These errors have now been corrected online. In Figure 1, the text that read “No data available/lost to follow-up n = 56” should have read “No data available/lost to follow-up n = 40”. In Table 3, the text reading “Mortality (all-cause) within 30 days of randomization” should have read “Mortality (all-cause) within 12 weeks of randomization”. The authors wish to emphasize that these data presentation errors are minor and do not in any way alter the statistical results or conclusions of the published paper