RESUMO
Introduction: Objectives: an expert report is presented on the situation of loss of muscle mass in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), with a proposal of what the clinical approach to this comorbidity should be, based on the evidence from the literature and clinical experience. Method: a qualitative expert opinion study was carried out using the nominal approach. A literature search on diabetes and muscle was made and submitted to a multidisciplinary group of 7 experts who through a face-to-face meeting discussed different aspects of the role of muscle mass in T2DM. Results: muscle mass must be taken into account in the clinical context of patients with T2DM. It has an enormous impact on patient function and quality of life, and is as important as adequate metabolic control of T2DM. Conclusions: in addition to drug therapy and diet adjustments, aerobic and strength activities are essential for maintaining muscle mass and function in diabetic patients. In concrete situations, artificial oral supplementation specific for muscle care could improve the situation of malnutrition and low muscle mass. Measures such as the walking speed test, chair test, or the SARC-F questionnaire, together with the Barthel index, constitute a first step to diagnose relevant impairment requiring intervention in patients with T2DM. This document seeks to answer some questions about the importance, assessment, and control of muscle mass in T2DM.
Introducción: Objetivos: informe de expertos para valorar la realidad de la pérdida de masa muscular en las personas con diabetes mellitus 2 (DM2) y proponer, en base a la evidencia de la bibliografía y la experiencia clínica, cómo debería ser el abordaje clínico de esta comorbilidad. Método: estudio cualitativo de opinión de expertos mediante metodología nominal. Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica sobre diabetes y músculos que se remitió a un grupo multidisciplinar de 7 expertos que, en reunión presencial, discutieron sobre diversos aspectos del papel de la masa muscular en la DM2. Resultados: la masa muscular debe tenerse en cuenta dentro del cuadro clínico del paciente con DM2. Repercute enormemente sobre la funcionalidad y la calidad de vida del paciente y es tan importante como el adecuado control metabólico de la DM2. Conclusión: además de la terapia farmacológica y la dieta adaptada, es imprescindible un patrón de actividad física aeróbica y de fuerza para el mantenimiento de la masa y la función muscular en el paciente diabético. En situaciones particulares, una suplementación oral artificial específica para el cuidado del músculo podría mejorar la situación de desnutrición y baja masa muscular. Medidas como el test de la velocidad de marcha, el test de la silla o el cuestionario SARC-F, junto a un índice de Barthel, son un primer paso para diagnosticar un deterioro relevante sobre el que actuar en el paciente DM2. Este documento pretende resolver algunos interrogantes sobre la importancia, la valoración y el control de la masa muscular en la DM2.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Sarcopenia , Humanos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Sarcopenia/epidemiologia , Qualidade de Vida , Comorbidade , Músculos , Força Muscular/fisiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of osteoporotic hip fracture in the Macarena Health Area (Seville). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a prospective observational study that collected all osteoporotic hip fractures that occurred between March 2013 and February 2014 at the Clinical Unit of Traumatology and Orthopaedics. All cases collected during the first 6 months of the study were followed for 1 year after the occurrence of the event. OUTCOME MEASURES: We evaluated the incidence of osteoporotic hip fractures in the Macarena Health Area (Seville) from 1 March 2013 to 28 February 2014, and we compared the incidence with that in 2 previous studies carried out with the same methodology in 1994 and 2006. Furthermore, we calculated the morbidity and degree of disability 1 year after the fracture occurred and determined mortality and the associated factors. RESULTS: The overall incidence was 228 per 100 000 individuals/year (95% CI 204.5 to 251.6), and the incidence was higher in women than in men. In women, the incidence rate decreased in all age groups over time, while in men, the incidence rate increased. The mortality rate 1 year after the episode was 27.2%. The factors associated with overall mortality were a body mass index below 25 kg/m2, renal failure and low plasma proteins. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a high incidence of osteoporotic hip fracture that is increasing in men, and in men it is associated with a higher mortality than in women. There is room to improve the modifiable factors associated with mortality and the available rehabilitation interventions to reduce the disability associated with these fractures.