Purpose: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the fourth leading cause of death in the world population. In addition to airflow obstruction, COPD is associated with multiple systemic manifestations, including impaired nutritional status or malnutrition and changes in body composition (low muscle mass, LMM). Poor nutritional status and sarcopenia in subjects with COPD leads to a worse prognosis and increases health-related costs. Data from previous studies indicate that 30–60% of subjects with COPD are malnourished, 20–40% have low muscle mass, and 15–21.6% have sarcopenia. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of malnutrition, sarcopenia, and malnutrition-sarcopenia syndrome in elderly subjects with COPD and investigate the relationship between COPD severity and these conditions.Patients and methods: A cross-sectional study involving 124 patients with stable COPD, aged ≥60, participating in a stationary pulmonary rehabilitation program. Nutritional status was assessed following the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria and sarcopenia with the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 (EWGSOP2) criteria. The results of pulmonary function tests and exercise capacity were obtained from the hospital database. Results: 22.6% of participants had malnutrition according to the GLIM criteria. Subjects with malnutrition had lower gait speed (p = 0.0112) and worse results of the Six Minute Walk Test. Sixteen participants (12.9%) had sarcopenia; 12 subjects with sarcopenia had concomitant malnutrition. The prevalence of severe and very severe obstruction (GOLD3/GOLD4) was 91.7%. It was significantly higher in patients with malnutrition-sarcopenia syndrome. Conclusions: Malnutrition was found in nearly one out of four subjects with COPD, while sarcopenia was one out of seven patients. About 10% of our study sample had malnutrition-sarcopenia syndrome. The prevalence of severe and very severe obstruction was significantly higher in patients with malnutrition-sarcopenia syndrome.

Up to 28% of elderly residents in Europe are at risk of malnutrition. As uniform diagnostic criteria for malnutrition have not been formulated, in autumn 2018, the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) presented a consensus on its diagnosis. According to the consensus, the diagnosis of malnutrition requires a positive screening test result for the risk of malnutrition, and the presence of at least one etiologic and one phenotypic criterion. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance and accuracy of the Mini Nutritional Assessment—Short Form (MNA-SF) against GLIM criteria. The analysis involved 273 community-dwelling volunteers aged ≥ 60 years. All participants were screened for malnutrition with the MNA-SF questionnaire. Next, the GLIM phenotypic and etiologic criteria were assessed in all subjects. Based on the presence of at least one phenotypic and one etiologic criterion, malnutrition was diagnosed in more than one-third of participants (n = 103, 37.7%). According to the MNA-SF, only 7.3% of subjects had malnutrition, and 28.2% were at risk of malnutrition. The agreement between the MNA-SF score and the GLIM criteria were observed in only 22.3% of the population. The sensitivity and specificity of MNA-SF against the GLIM criteria were fair (59.2% and 78.8%, respectively). The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.77, indicating the fair ability of MNA-SF to diagnose malnutrition. Based on the present study results, the best solution may be an optional replacement of the screening tool in the first step of the GLIM algorithm with clinical suspicion of malnutrition.

Poor nutritional status (PNS) is a modifiable factor determining abnormalities in body composition-sarcopenia, obesity, and sarcopenic obesity (SO). We aimed to assess the prevalence of these conditions and their association with PNS in 211 community-dwelling older adults. Sarcopenia was diagnosed based on the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 (EWGSOP2) recommendations. Obesity was diagnosed with the Percent Body Fat (>42% in women and >30% in men). Subjects fulfilling the criteria for obesity and concomitantly with reduced lower and/or upper limbs muscle strength and muscle mass (ALM/BMI < 0.512 in women and <0.789 in men) were classified as SO phenotype. Participants without obesity and sarcopenia were categorized as ‘normal’ phenotype. Nutritional status was estimated with the Mini Nutritional Assessment, and a score of <24 indicated PNS. In total, 49.8% participants had abnormal body composition (60.7% men and 42.5% women; p = 0.001). Sarcopenia, obesity, and SO were diagnosed in 10%, 32.7%, and 7.1% of subjects. PNS was found in 31.3% of the study sample. Its prevalence differed between phenotypes: 81% in sarcopenia, 60% in SO, 14.5% in obesity, and 28.3% in the ‘normal’ phenotype group (p = 0.000). Based on the results, abnormal body composition is prevalent in elderly subjects. Sarcopenia and SO are often associated with PNS.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a recognized risk factor for malnutrition. The European Respiratory Society (ERS) statement included nutritional status assessment and dietary intervention as essential components of comprehensive management in subjects with COPD. According to the GLIM algorithm, the first step in diagnosing malnutrition is risk screening with a validated tool. Our study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of three screening tools (MNA-SF, MUST, and NRS-2002) used in the GLIM algorithm in older patients with COPD. Additionally, we evaluated the agreement between these tools in the diagnostics of malnutrition. We performed a cross-sectional study of 124 patients aged at least 60 years with COPD diagnosed, based on the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). We assessed the participants’ nutritional status with the three examined screening questionnaires (MNA-SF, MUST, and NRS-2002). Regardless of their results, we performed full malnutrition diagnostics following the GLIM algorithm in all subjects. The proportion of malnourished participants varied from 18.5% for the MUST questionnaire to 27.4% for the MNA-SF and 57.3% for the NRS-2002 score. Based on the GLIM criteria, malnutrition was diagnosed in 48 subjects (38.7%). All assessed questionnaires had an unsatisfactory sensitivity against the GLIM criteria for malnutrition: it was fair (58.3%) for the MNA-SF tool and poor for the MUST and NRS-2002 questionnaires (47.9% for both questionnaires). Considering the negative health consequences of malnutrition, a full diagnostic including GLIM etiologic and phenotypic criteria should be recommended in all elderly patients with COPD, regardless of the screening results.

The research aims to compare the accuracy of the mini-mental state examination (MMSE), the Addenbrooke’s cognitive examination III (ACE-III) and the mini-Addenbrooke’s cognitive examination (M-ACE) within the Polish population. The model comprised several stages: the features of each test were compared; the shifts in result categorisations between the norm and below the norm were analysed; a third category—mild cognitive impairment (MCI)—was included. Additionally, particular ACE-III domains that scored below domain-specific norm thresholds were analysed to establish the potential early predictors of dementia. All tests correlated to a high and very high degree—cf. MMSE and ACE-III (r = 0.817; p < 0.001), MMSE and M-ACE (r = 0.753; p < 0.001), ACE-III and M-ACE (r = 0.942; p < 0.001). The area under the ROC curve for the ACE-III diagnostic variable had a high value (AUC = 0.920 ± 0.014). A cut-off point of 81 points was suggested for ACE-III; the M-ACE diagnostic variable had an equally high value (AUC = 0.891 ± 0.017). A cut-off point of 20 points was suggested. A significant decrease in the mean score values for people who scored norm or below the norm under ACE-III, as compared to the MMSE results for norm (p < 0.0001), occurred for speech fluency (which decreased by 26.4%). The tests in question are characterised by high sensitivity and specificity. Targeted ACE-III seems best recommended for use in specialised diagnostic centres, whereas M-ACE appears to be a better suited diagnostic alternative for primary health care centres in comparison to MMSE.