ArticleJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2026
The Clinical Impact of Sarcopenia and Delirium in Hospitalized Elderly Patients: An Analysis Using Muscle Ultrasound.
Article in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Value of Gastrocnemius Shear Wave Elastography Combined With BMI in Different Stages of Sarcopenia in Elderly Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Sex Differences: A Cross-Sectional Study.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Article
- Delirium in older hospitalized patients: a decade-later study highlighting medical and medication-related etiologies beyond muscarinic antagonism.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Comparative Performance of SARC-F, SARC-CalF, SARC-F + EBM, and Ishii Score for Detecting Sarcopenia in Hospitalised Geriatric Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- The Clinical Impact of Sarcopenia and Delirium in Hospitalized Elderly Patients: An Analysis Using Muscle Ultrasound.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSarcopenia and delirium are two highly prevalent clinical syndromes among hospitalized elderly patients, both independently associated with adverse outcomes such as increased risk of falls, disability and mortality. Although a correlation between sarcopenia and delirium has been previously reported, past studies have often relied on less reliable surrogate markers for sarcopenia, leading to potential inaccuracies in diagnosis and assessment. This study aims to address these limitations by utilizing a more precise and reliable diagnostic tool for sarcopenia, specifically, muscle ultrasound (US) to measure the quadriceps femoris muscle and its pennation angle, to accurately evaluate the correlation between sarcopenia and delirium in acutely admitted geriatric patients.
methodsWe used muscle US to measure sarcopenia with reliable markers, specifically the Ultrasound Sarcopenia Index (USSI). This index evaluates the ratio between vastus lateralis thickness and fascicle length (L/f), offering a detailed view of muscle structure that is not affected by sex or body size.
resultsIn 194 patients (mean age 86.5 years; 46.4% women; 81.4% with delirium), USSI correlated with MMSE (r = -0.619, p < 0.001), 4AT (r = 0.844, p < 0.001), ADL/IADL (r ≈ -0.32, p < 0.001), BMI, grip strength and muscle thickness (all p < 0.001). Women had higher USSI and worse cognitive/frailty scores; patterns were consistent across sexes.
conclusionOur findings are expected to support the implementation of more targeted assessments and interventions, emphasizing the crucial role of accurate sarcopenia diagnosis in improving outcomes for elderly patients and highlighting its interconnectedness with delirium in comprehensive geriatric care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.