Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of diagnostics tools for sarcopenia severity using the item response theory (IRT)

  • Published:
The journal of nutrition, health & aging

Abstract

Objective

To use the item response theory (IRT) methods to examine the degree to which the four selected tools reflect sarcopenia and to arrange them according to their ability to estimate sarcopenia severity.

Design

A cross-sectional study aimed at verifying the possibilities of using diagnostic tools for sarcopenia.

Setting and Participants

The study included residents living in an assisted living unit at the Senior Centre in Blansko (South Moravia, Czech Republic) (n=77). Sarcopenia was estimated according to the proposals of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) using calf circumference, the EWGSOP algorithm, hand grip strength, and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB).

Results

The results from the IRT model showed that these four methods indicate strong unidimensionality so that they measure the same latent variable. The methods ranked according to the discrimination level ranging from high to low discrimination where the calf circumference was the most discriminatory (Hi = 0.86) and the SPPB together with hand grip strength were the least discriminatory (both Hi = 0.44).

Conclusion

We are recommending to identify mild sarcopenia by SPPB or hand grip strength, moderate sarcopenia by the EWGSOP algorithm and severe sarcopenia by the calf circumference.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rosenberg IH. Epidemiologic and Methodologic Problems in Determining Nutritional-Status of Older Persons -Proceedings of a Conference Held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, October 19-21, 1988 -Summary Comments. Am J Clin Nutr 1989;50: 1231–1233

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cesari M, Fielding R, Benichou O, Bernabei R et al. Pharmacological Interventions in Frailty and Sarcopenia: Report by the International Conference on Frailty and Sarcopenia Research Task Force. J Frailty Aging 2015;4: 114–120

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Bahat G, Saka B, Tufan F, Sivrikaya S et al. Prevalence of sarcopenia and its association with functional and nutritional status among male residents in a nursing home in Turkey. Aging Male 2010;13:211–214. doi: 10.3109/13685538.2010.489130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Landi F, Liperoti R, Fusco D, Mastropaolo S et al. Sarcopenia and mortality among older nursing home residents. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2012;13:121–126. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2011.07.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wen X, An P, Chen WC, Lv Y, Fu Q. Comparisons of sarcopenia prevalence based on different diagnostic criteria in chinese older adults. J Nutr Health Aging 2015;19: 342–347. doi: 10.1007/s12603-014-0561-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y et al. Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: Report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. Age Ageing 2010;39:412–23. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afq034

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. de Ayala RJ (2008) The Theory and Practice of Item Response Theory. Guilford Publications, New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hambleton RK, Swaminathan H. Item Response Theory: Principles and Applications (Evaluation in Education and Human Services). Springer, New York, 1985

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Reckase MD. Multidimensional Item Response Theory. Springer-Verlag, New York

  10. Ham, RK. Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. SAGE Publications, London, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  11. Reise SP, Haviland MG. Item response theory and the measurement of clinical change. J Pers Assess. 2005;84:228–238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Van der Linden WJ, Hambleton RK. Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. Springer, New York, 2013

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mokken RJ. A Theory and Procedure of Scale Analysis: With Applications in Political Research. De Gruyter, Berlin, 1971

    Google Scholar 

  14. Molenaar IW. Mokken scaling revisited. Kwantitatieve Methoden. 1982;3:145–164

    Google Scholar 

  15. Spector WD, Fleishman JA. Combining activities of daily living with instrumental activities of daily living to measure functional disability. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 1998;53:S46–57

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. McGrory S, Shenkin SD, Austin EJ, Starr JM. Lawton IADL scale in dementia: can item response theory make it more informative? Age Ageing. 2014;43:491–495. doi: 10.1093/ageing/aft173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jette AM, Haley SM, Coster WJ, Kooyoomjian JT et al. Late life function and disability instrument: I. Development and evaluation of the disability component. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2002;57:M209–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rolland Y, Lauwers-Cances V, Cournot M, Nourhashemi F et al. Sarcopenia, calf circumference, and physical function of elderly women: a cross-sectional study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51:1120–1124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Janssen I, Baumgartner RN, Ross R, Rosenberg IH et al. Skeletal muscle cutpoints associated with elevated physical disability risk in older men and women. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;159:413–421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lauretani F, Russo CR, Bandinelli S, Bartali B et al. Age-associated changes in skeletal muscles and their effect on mobility: an operational diagnosis of sarcopenia. J Appl Physiol. 2003;95:1851–1860

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L, Glynn RJ et al. A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: association with selfreported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol. 1994;49:M85–94

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Van der Ark LA. Mokken scale analysis in R. J Stat Softw. 2007;20:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sijtsma K, Debets P, Molenaar IW. Mokken scale analysis for polychotomous items: theory, a computer program and an empirical application. Quality and Quantity. 1990;24:173–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Stochl J, Jones PB, Croudace TJ. Mokken scale analysis of mental health and well-being questionnaire item responses: a non-parametric IRT method in empirical research for applied health researchers. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:74. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-74

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Ligtvoet R, Van der Ark LA, Te Marvelde JM, Sijtsma K. Investigating an Invariant Item Ordering for Polytomously Scored Items. Educ Psychol Meas. 2010;70:578–595. doi: 10.1177/0013164409355697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Loevinger J. A Systematic Approach to the Construction and Evaluation of Tests of Ability. Psychol Monogr. 1947;61: 1–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Štochl J. Nonparametric extension of item response theory models and its usefullness for assessment of dimensionality of motor tests. Acta Univ Carol Kin. 2006;42:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  28. Sijtsma K, Meijer RR, Van der Ark AL. Mokken scale analysis as time goes by: An update for scaling practitioners. Pers Individ Dif. 2011;50:31–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sijtsma K, Molenaar IW. Introduction to Nonparametric Item Response Theory. SAGE Publications, London, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  30. Sijtsma K, Junker BW. A survey of theory and methods of invariant item ordering. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 1996;49:79–105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Vellas B, Fielding R, Miller R, Rolland Y et al. Designing drug trials for sarcopenia in older adults with hip fracture–a task force from the international conference on frailty and sarcopenia research (ICFSR). J Frailty Aging 2014;3:199–204

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. McLean RR, Shardell MD, Alley DE, Cawthon PM et al. Criteria for clinically relevant weakness and low lean mass and their longitudinal association with incident mobility impairment and mortality: the foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) sarcopenia project. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2014;69: 576–583. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glu012

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Sallinen J, Stenholm S, Rantanen T, Heliovaara M et al. Hand-grip strength cut points to screen older persons at risk for mobility limitation. J Am Geriatr Soc 2010;58: 1721–1726. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03035.x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Teresi JA. Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE): scaling the MMSE using item response theory (IRT). J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:256–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Steffl M, Masek M, Petr M, Bunc V et al. Appropriateness of five measures proposed by EWGSOP for diagnosing sarcopenia in clinical practice among the elderly living at the senior centre in Blansko, Czech republic-a case study. J Aging Res Clin Practice. 2013;2:221–225

    Google Scholar 

  36. Huo YR, Suriyaarachchi P, Gomez F, Curcio CL et al. Comprehensive nutritional status in sarco-osteoporotic older fallers. J Nutr Health Aging. 2015;19:474–80. doi: 10.1007/s12603-014-0543-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

    M. Steffl, M. Musalek, V. Kramperova, M. Petr & E. Kohlikova

  2. Centre of Expertise in Longevity and Long-Term Care, Faculty of Humanities, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

    I. Holmerova

  3. School of Aging Studies, University of South Florida, Tampa, USA

    L. Volicer

  4. 3rd Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

    L. Volicer

  5. Charles University in Prague Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Department of Physiology and Biochemistry, Jose Martiho 31, Prague, 16252, Czech Republic

    M. Steffl

Authors
  1. M. Steffl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Musalek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. Kramperova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Petr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. E. Kohlikova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. I. Holmerova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. L. Volicer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Steffl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Steffl, M., Musalek, M., Kramperova, V. et al. Assessment of diagnostics tools for sarcopenia severity using the item response theory (IRT). J Nutr Health Aging 20, 1051–1055 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-016-0713-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-016-0713-2

Key words

Search

Navigation