4.4 Article

Rationale and design of Juntendo Sarcopenia Registration to explore the predictors and prognosis of sarcopenia and frailty in the elderly in TOKYO (JUSTICE-TOKYO)

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ggi.14779

关键词

frailty; life expectancy; outpatients; sarcopenia; university hospital

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study focuses on the prevalence, predictors, and prognosis of frailty and sarcopenia in elderly outpatients, providing valuable insights for extending healthy life expectancy. The results showed a high prevalence of sarcopenia and frailty among the participants, highlighting the significance of the study.
Aim: This study aimed to clarify the prevalence, predictors, and prognosis of frailty and sarcopenia in both cross-sectional and longitudinal study of the real world.Methods: The JUSTICE-TOKYO study is a single-center, prospective observational study of elderly patients. Patients aged >= 65 years who regularly visited our center were enrolled and followed up for 4 years (n = 1042). The diagnosis of sarcopenia and frailty in the enrolled patients was based on the criteria established by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and Japanese version of the Cardiovascular Health Study criteria, respectively. The primary end point is the incidence of all-cause mortality and hospitalization for treatment. The secondary end points are clinically significant bleeding, cardiovascular events, strokes, malignancies, incidence of falling, fractures, pneumonia, and the onset of new dementia cases.Results: A total of 1042 patients were enrolled in this study. The mean age of the cohort at baseline was 78.2 years, with 56% being women. Among the enrolled patients, 223 (21.4%) diagnosed with sarcopenia, 172 (16.5%) exhibited frailty, and 541 (51.9%) fell into the prefrailty category.Conclusions: The JUSTICE-TOKYO study provides valuable insights into the prevalence of sarcopenia and frailty among older adult outpatients in a real-world context and contributes to measures aimed at extending healthy life expectancy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据