Outcome Priorities for Older Persons With Sarcopenia.


Journal

Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
ISSN: 1538-9375
Titre abrégé: J Am Med Dir Assoc
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100893243

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 2020
Historique:
received: 24 05 2019
revised: 27 08 2019
accepted: 31 08 2019
pubmed: 2 11 2019
medline: 29 5 2021
entrez: 2 11 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To evaluate patients' preferences for sarcopenia outcomes. Discrete-choice experiment (DCE) SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling individuals older than 65 years suffering from sarcopenia recruited in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland, who visited the clinic and were cognitively able to understand and fill out the survey. In the DCE survey, participants were repetitively asked to choose which one of the 2 patients suffering from sarcopenia deserves treatment the most. The 2 patients presented different levels of risk for 5 preselected sarcopenia outcomes: quality of life, mobility, domestic activities, fatigue, and falls. The DCE included 12 choice sets. Mixed logit panel model was used to estimate patients' preferences and latent class model was conducted to identify profiles of responses. A total of 216 sarcopenic persons were included for the analysis (68% women; mean age 78 years). All 5 preselected sarcopenia outcomes were shown to be significant. Overall, the most important sarcopenia outcome was mobility (30%), followed by the ability to manage domestic activities (22%), the risk of falls (18%), fatigue (17%), and quality of life (14%). The latent class model identified 2 classes of respondents. In the first class (probability of 56%), participants valued mobility the most (42%), followed by the ability to manage domestic activities (23%) and risk of falls (17%). In the second class, fatigue was the most important outcome (27%) followed by domestic activities (19%) and risk of falls (19%). No statistically significant associations between the latent classes and sociodemographic characteristics were found. This study suggests that all 5 preselected outcomes were important for sarcopenic older individuals. Overall, the most important outcomes were mobility and the ability to manage domestic activities, although variations in preferences were observed between respondents. This could help in incorporating patient preferences when designing appropriate solutions for individuals with sarcopenia.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31672566
pii: S1525-8610(19)30643-7
doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2019.08.026
pmc: PMC7021510
mid: EMS85472
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

267-271.e2

Subventions

Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : U.1475(U.1475)
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_U147585827
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_U147585819
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_UP_A620_1014
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_UU_12011/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : G0400491
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_U147585824
Pays : United Kingdom

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Références

Value Health. 2016 Jun;19(4):300-15
pubmed: 27325321
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020 Feb;21(2):284-286
pubmed: 31668737
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2014 May;69(5):547-58
pubmed: 24737557
Age Ageing. 2019 Jan 1;48(1):16-31
pubmed: 30312372
Clin Geriatr Med. 2011 Aug;27(3):387-99
pubmed: 21824554
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Feb;36(2):175-187
pubmed: 28975582
Age Ageing. 2010 Jul;39(4):412-23
pubmed: 20392703
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2011 Sep 1;9(5):331-47
pubmed: 21875163
Patient. 2015 Oct;8(5):373-84
pubmed: 25726010
Arch Public Health. 2014 Dec 18;72(1):45
pubmed: 25810912
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2017 Dec;17(6):531-542
pubmed: 29058478
Maturitas. 2019 Jan;119:61-69
pubmed: 30502752
Value Health. 2011 Jun;14(4):403-13
pubmed: 21669364
Age Ageing. 2015 Nov;44(6):960-6
pubmed: 26433796
Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2017 May;19(5):25
pubmed: 28386762
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 17;12(1):e0169548
pubmed: 28095426

Auteurs

Mickael Hiligsmann (M)

Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: m.hiligsmann@maastrichtuniversity.nl.

Charlotte Beaudart (C)

Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Aging, Liège, Belgium.

Olivier Bruyère (O)

Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Aging, Liège, Belgium.

Emmanuel Biver (E)

Service of Bone Diseases, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland.

Jürgen Bauer (J)

Center for Geriatric Medicine and Network Aging Research (NAR), University of Heidelberg, Germany.

Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft (AJ)

Servicio de Geriatría, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal (IRYCIS), Madrid, Spain.

Antonella Gesmundo (A)

Department of Medicine, Rehabilitation Hospital, Motta di Livenza (TV), Italy.

Sabine Goisser (S)

Center for Geriatric Medicine and Network Aging Research (NAR), University of Heidelberg, Germany.

Francesco Landi (F)

Department of Geriatrics,Neurosciences and Orthopedics, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart Rome, Milano, Italy.

Médéa Locquet (M)

Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Aging, Liège, Belgium.

Stefania Maggi (S)

National Research Council, Neuroscience Institute, Aging Branch, Padua, Italy.

Rene Rizzoli (R)

Service of Bone Diseases, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland.

Yves Rolland (Y)

Gérontopôle of Toulouse, University of Toulouse III, CHU Purpan, INSERM 1027, Toulouse, France.

Nieves Vaquero (N)

Servicio de Geriatría, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal (IRYCIS), Madrid, Spain.

Cyrus Cooper (C)

MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom; NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Jean-Yves Reginster (JY)

Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; WHO Collaborating Centre for Public Health Aspects of Musculo-Skeletal Health and Aging, Liège, Belgium; KSA Chair for Biomarkers of Chronic Diseases, Biochemistry Department, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH