The Descriptive Epidemiology of Probable Sarcopenia in Community-Dwelling Tanzanians: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study
Résumé fourni par la source
Objectives: This study presents the descriptive epidemiology of probable sarcopenia in a community setting in Eastern Africa. Methods: This is a cross-sectional observational study. Five random villages in Hai District, Kilimanjaro region, Tanzania, were selected. A total of 1207 community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and over were screened using a short frailty screening tool (B-FIT). A randomised frailty-weighted sample of 234 were included in analysis. Survey data and physical measurements including hand grip strength (HGS), Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and bio-impedance analysis (BIA) were conducted. The prevalence of probable sarcopenia in the screened population was calculated using the revised European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) guidelines. Logistic regression was used to explore associations between indicators of nutritional status and socioeconomic position, and probable sarcopenia. Results: The mean HGS in men was 28.5 kg (SD 10.4) and in women was 20.5 kg (SD 6.4). Estimated prevalence of probable sarcopenia in the community-dwelling population aged ≥60 years was 31.5% (95% CI 19.65-43.35) in men, and 9.79% (95% CI 5.95-13.63) in women. Conclusions: Probable sarcopenia was prevalent in a study of community-dwelling older Tanzanian adults. It is associated with markers of malnutrition and lower socioeconomic position in this context.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- The Descriptive Epidemiology of Probable Sarcopenia in Community-Dwelling Tanzanians: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study
- Date Crossref
- 01/09/2026
- Éditeur
- Hylonome Publications
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.