Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of mean mid-thigh MRI cross sectional area (cm2), body weight and Barthel-Index of study population stratified by mobility status at baseline (T0) and follow-up (T1)

From: The impact of disease-related immobilization on thigh muscle mass and strength in older hospitalized patients

 

Immobile group (n = 22)

Mobile group (n = 19)

Mid-thigh CSA (cm2)

T0

T1

ΔT1–T0

Δ/day

T0

T1

ΔT1–T0

Δ/day

Muscle area

78.7 ± 17.3

74.8 ± 17.9

−3.9 ± 5.0**†

−0.3 ± 0.4††

84.0 ± 19.3

84.5 ± 20.6

0.5 ± 5.6

0.1 ± 0.5

Subcutaneous fat area

80.0 ± 44.4

74.7 ± 40.0

−5.3 ± 11.1*

−0.5 ± 1.0

100.3 ± 61.3

97.9 ± 56.9

−2.4 ± 18.2

−0.1 ± 1.3

Intermuscular fat area

17.1 ± 9.0

16.0 ± 8.9

−1.1 ± 2.9

−0.1 ± 0.2

19.2 ± 10.3

19.4 ± 12.1

0.2 ± 3.5

0.0 ± 0.3

Body weight (kg)

70.9 ± 14.4

70.1 ± 14.9

−0.8 ± 2.5

−0.05 ± 0.2

77.2 ± 19.0

75.8 ± 19.0

−1.5 ± 7.1

−0.1 ± 0.5

Barthel-Index

42.3 ± 11.4

61.8 ± 16.8

19.5 ± 13.0***†

1.4 ± 1.0

68.7 ± 11.9

81.3 ± 8.8

12.6 ± 8.7***

0.9 ± 0.6

  1. All values are means ± SDs. No significant group difference in time between baseline and follow-up of MRI scan was observed (P = 0.072). The median time of follow-up for MRI scan was 13 days in both mobile (IQR: 12–15) and immobile groups (IQR: 10–14)
  2. CSA cross sectional area, MRI Magnetic Resonance Imaging, ΔT1–T0 difference between baseline and follow-up, Δ/day change per day
  3. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 Difference between T0 and T1 within group (paired t test)
  4. †P < 0.05 Difference in ΔT1–T0 between groups (unpaired t test)
  5. ††P < 0.05 Difference in Δ/day between groups (unpaired t test)
Back to article page

BMC Geriatrics

ISSN: 1471-2318

Contact us