Attitude ; Humans ; Islam ; Ophthalmic Solutions ; Singapore

INTRODUCTIONThis study aimed to examine the attendance rates of post-discharge supervised rehabilitation as recommended by the multidisciplinary team at discharge among subacutely disabled adults and the barriers preventing adherence.

MATERIALS AND METHODSPatients were from a community hospital, aged 40 years or older. They had been assessed by a multidisciplinary team to benefit from rehabilitation after discharge, were mentally competent and communicative. We used a sequential qualitative-quantitative mixed methods study design. In the initial qualitative phase, we studied the patient-perceived barriers to adherence to rehabilitation using semi-structured interviews. Emerging themes were then analysed and used to develop a questionnaire to measure the extent of these barriers. In the subsequent quantitative phase, the questionnaire was used with telephone follow-up at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after discharge.

RESULTSQualitative phase interviews (n = 41) revealed specific perceived financial, social, physical and health barriers. At the start of the quantitative phase (n = 70), 87.1% of the patients viewed rehabilitation as beneficial, but overall longitudinal attendance rate fell from 100% as inpatient to 20.3% at 3 months, 9.8% at 6 months, 6.3% at 9 months and 4.3% at 12 months. The prevalence of physical and social barriers were high initially but decreased with time. In contrast, the prevalence of financial and perceptual barriers increased with time.

CONCLUSIONAttendance of post-hospitalisation rehabilitation in Singapore is low. Self-perceived barriers to post-discharge rehabilitation attendance were functional, social, financial and perceptual, and their prevalence varied with time.

Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Female ; Health Services Accessibility ; Hospitals, Community ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Patient Compliance ; Patient Discharge ; Qualitative Research ; Rehabilitation ; Self Concept ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Time Factors

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.

Purpose: Diagnosing sarcopenia necessitates the measurement of skeletal muscle mass. However, guidelines lack a standardized imaging modality with thresholds validated among Asians. This systematic review compared ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)/body composition monitoring in the detection of sarcopenia within Asian populations. Methods: PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for studies analyzing ultrasonography, CT, MRI, and BIA in diagnosing sarcopenia among Asians. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: Pooled findings from 21,598 patients across 25 studies were examined. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, ultrasound displayed a pooled mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.767 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.709–0.806), with mean sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI, 0.744–0.846) and specificity of 73.1% (95% CI, 0.648–0.774), for detecting sarcopenia in Asian populations. CT exhibited an AUC of 0.720 (sensitivity, 54.0%; specificity, 92.0%). MRI demonstrated an AUC of 0.839 (sensitivity, 67.0%; specificity, 66.0%). BIA displayed an AUC of 0.905 (95% CI, 0.842–0.968), 80.7% sensitivity (95% CI, 0.129–0.679), and 82.4% specificity (95% CI, 0.191–0.633). Conclusion Various modalities aid in diagnosing sarcopenia, and selection should be individualized. Although only BIA and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry are recommended by the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia and the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, ultrasound imaging may hold diagnostic value for sarcopenia in the Asian population. In certain groups, diagnostic use of CT and MRI is warranted. Future research can standardize and validate modality-specific thresholds and protocols within Asian populations.