Clinical Screening Tools for Sarcopenia and Its Management

Table 2

Strengths and weaknesses of sarcopenia screening tools.

	Strengths/advantages	Limitations/disadvantages
EWGSOP algorithm [10]	Simple two-step algorithm	No validation studies evaluated this tool; Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of this tool are unknown; Limited clinical utility in screening older adults for sarcopenia due to the high proportion of subjects selected to further undergo muscle assessment
Goodman et al. [15]	Uses two simple variable	Age range limited to 65–85 years; Adults with morbid obesity and significant disability were excluded from the derivation study; Screening for only probability of low muscle mass
Ishii et al. [16]	Simple tool requiring three variables	External validity is unknown; Calf circumference is not currently a routine measurement in clinical practice and therefore may require training to measure this accurately
SARC-F questionnaire [20]	Uses 5 questions without requiring measurements involving cutoff values; They have comparable specificity and predictive power for adverse outcomes when validated against criteria requiring measurements developed by consensus panels (American, European, and Asian).; Rapid screening and cost-effective	Low sensitivity may miss out people who are sarcopenic but classified as “not sarcopenic” according to SARC-F; questionnaire not currently used in clinical practice
Anthropometric PE [17, 18]	Good discriminatory tool as a “rule-out” screening test; Variables are already a routine clinical practice such as measurement of weight, height, and gender; Can be used as screening tool in primary care setting	Not yet validated in care facility residents or hospital inpatients; Not yet validated in non-Caucasian population.

EWGSOP: European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People; NPV: negative predictive value; SARC-F: slowness, assistance with walking, rising from chair, climbing stairs, and falls questionnaire; PE: prediction equation; PPV: positive predictive value.