Recently the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) has updated diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia, which consist of one or more measures of muscle strength, muscle mass, and physical performance, plus an initial screening test called SARC-F. The main objective was to compare the number of cases of sarcopenia, using the different measurements and screening options. A cross-sectional study was conducted on Spanish older adults (n = 272, 72% women). Combining the different measures proposed by the steps described in the EWGSOP2 algorithm, 12 options were obtained (A–L). These options were studied in each of the three models: (1) using SARC-F as initial screening; (2) not using SARC-F; and (3) using SARC-CalF instead of SARC-F. A χ² independence test was statistically significant (χ²(6) = 88.41, p < 0.001), and the association between the algorithm used and the classification of sarcopenia was moderate (Cramer’s V = 0.226). We conclude that the different EWGSOP2 measurement options imply case-finding differences in the studied population. Moreover, when applying the SARC-F, the number of people classified as sarcopenic decreases. Finally, when SARC-CalF is used as screening, case finding of sarcopenic people decreases. Thus, clinical settings should consider these outcomes, since these steps can make preventive and therapeutic interventions on sarcopenia vary widely.

Background: Recently, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) has updated the sarcopenia definition based on objective evaluation of muscle strength, mass and physical performance. The aim of this study was to analyse the relationship between sarcopenia and clinical aspects such as functionality, comorbidity, polypharmacy, hospitalisations and falls in order to support sarcopenia screening in institutionalised older adults, as well as to estimate the prevalence of sarcopenia in this population using the EWGSOP2 new algorithm. Methods: A multicentre cross-sectional study was conducted on institutionalised older adults (n = 132, 77.7% female, mean age 82 years). Application of the EWGSOP2 algorithm consisted of the SARC-F questionnaire, handgrip strength (HG), appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASMI) and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Clinical study variables were: Barthel Index (BI), Abbreviated Charlson’s Comorbidity Index (ACCI), number of medications, hospital stays and falls. Results: Age, BI and ACCI were shown to be predictors of the EWGSOP2 sarcopenia definition (Nagelkerke’s R-square = 0.34), highlighting the ACCI. Sarcopenia was more prevalent in older adults aged over 85 (p = 0.005), but no differences were found according to gender (p = 0.512). Conclusion: BI and the ACCI can be considered predictors that guide healthcare professionals in early sarcopenia identification and therapeutic approach.

In both Spain and Sweden the most important public support for older people that is provided in their own homes are home-help services. In Sweden, these programmes were expanded in years of economic growth but recently have radically declined. Spain still strives to expand them in spite of financial problems. Both countries ration these services but in different ways. Spain provides relatively few hours of help with household tasks, primarily to poor old people. At present, one to two per cent of the 65-plus population is covered. Local government is still trying to reach more people to relieve pressure on limited institutional care. Sweden continues to cut down the service from the present coverage of nine per cent of the 65-plus population. It is focusing on the oldest and frailest people of all social classes who live alone. It is gradually being transformed into home health care. Institutional care has not been cut back to the same degree. Spain uses strict needs assessments and eligibility criteria to target clients. Sweden has sharpened its needs assessments and raised fees to discourage users with lesser needs.

Sociales en la actualidad presentan muchas deficiencias, que se han evidenciado especialmente con el COVID-19. Estos hechos han convertido al cohousing senior en una atractiva alternativa de alojamiento para ellos. El avance del cohousing senior supone un empuje hacia la modernización de los alojamientos y servicios sociales para las personas mayores, en particular de las residencias. El cohousing senior lleva varios años de experiencia en otros países europeos, y representa una forma de convivir deseable entre los mayores y/o las familias que desean compañía y compartir tareas. Para conocer mejor la posible evolución futura del cohousing senior se introducen algunos apuntes del desarrollo de estos alojamientos en Suecia, un país modelo y guía en materia de políticas de viviendas y cuidados para personas mayores. El objetivo de este artículo es analizar el crecimiento de los alojamientos colaborativos para personas mayores en España desde la economía social, y conocer los problemas encontrados en su implementación, y las soluciones e impulsos políticos a su desarrollo. Hemos revisado la literatura española e internacional sobre cohousing senior durante la última década, y buscado datos en España sobre estos alojamientos en la prensa local y nacional y en la base de datos del proyecto MOVICOMA para determinar su grado de implantación y características. También se consultaron los barómetros de UDP sobre cohousing. Y hemos encontrado que su funcionamiento en Españaes incipiente, y que existen pocas iniciativas consolidadas, aunque bastantes en marcha, y se comprueba que la economía social juega un papel primordial. El Covid-19 ha elevado la demanda de estos alojamientos y alternativas de cuidado porque promueven y facilitan contactos sociales, evitan riesgos de las residencias, y mantienen a los participantes activos. Pero su implementación es lenta porque cuentan con importantes limitaciones a nivel de diseño, localización, financiación, burocracia excesiva y escaso apoyo público. Últimamente, a nivel político hay un mayor interés por estos alojamientos. Los planes de recuperación del Gobierno de España y algunas regulaciones de las CCAA y Ayuntamientos incorporan estrategias específicas sobre viviendas, otras para la Economía Social y cooperativas, y para el cuidado de los mayores (SAAD) que afectan directa o indirectamente al cohousing senior.