Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 May 17;21(1):926.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10511-7.

Sarcopenia screening strategies in older people: a cost effectiveness analysis in Iran

Affiliations

Sarcopenia screening strategies in older people: a cost effectiveness analysis in Iran

Ali Darvishi et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background and objectives: Sarcopenia is an important age-related disease which can lead to an increased risk of mortality, falls, fractures, and poor quality of life. So, timely detection can be effective in reducing the burden of disease. The aim of this study was to identify the most cost-effective strategy for sarcopenia screening in Iran.

Materials and methods: We constructed a Markov transition model over a life-time horizon based on natural history. Compared strategies included Sarcopenia scoring assessment models (SarSA-Mod), European working group on sarcopenia in older people (EWGSOP), Mini sarcopenia risk assessment (MSRA) and SARC-F. Parameters values were extracted from primary data and the literature, and the costs and Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated for each strategy. Sensitivity analysis of uncertain parameters was also performed to determine the robustness of the model. Analysis was performed using 2020 version of TreeAge Pro software.

Results: All four screening strategies increased life time QALYs. After removing dominated strategy, the incremental cost per QALY gained for sarcopenia screening varied from $1875.67 for EWGSOP to $1898.33 for MSRA. Our base-case analysis showed that the most cost-effective strategy was EWGSOP and 2nd best was SarSA-Mod with $43,414.3 and $42,663.3 net monetary benefits given one GDP per capita ($5520.311) as willingness to pay, respectively. Sensitivity analysis of model parameters also showed robustness of results.

Conclusions: The results of the study, as the first economic evaluation of sarcopenia screening, showed that the EWGSOP strategy is more cost-effective than other strategies.

Keywords: Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA); QALY; Sarcopenia; Screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Decision Tree Model for CEA of Sarcopenia Screening Strategies
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Markov Model for CEA of Sarcopenia Screening Strategies
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Cost-Effectiveness Plane of Sarcopenia Screening Strategies
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Deterministic Sensitivity Analysis using Tornado Diagram
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Cost Effectiveness Acceptability Curve of Sarcopenia Screening Strategies
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Strategy Selection and Optimization Probability Diagram

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. As’ habi A, Najafi I, Tabibi H, Hedayati M. Prevalence of sarcopenia and dynapenia and their determinants in Iranian peritoneal dialysis patients. Iranian J Kidney Dis. 2018;12(1):53. - PubMed
    1. Heshmat R, Shafiee G, Shadman Z, Hashemi R, Khatami F, Ahadi Z, et al. A comprehensive manual on sarcopenia. 1. Noavaran Sina: Tehran; 2017.
    1. Karakelides H, Nair KS. Sarcopenia of aging and its metabolic impact. Curr Top Dev Biol. 2005;68:123–148. doi: 10.1016/S0070-2153(05)68005-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Narici MV, Reeves ND, Morse CI, Maganaris CN. Muscular adaptations to resistance exercise in the elderly. J Musculoskelet Nueronal Interact. 2004;4(2):161–164. - PubMed
    1. Lovell DI, Cuneo R, Gass GC. The effect of strength training and short-term detraining on maximum force and the rate of force development of older men. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010;109(3):429–435. doi: 10.1007/s00421-010-1375-0. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources