- Design
- single-centre cross-sectional study with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, objective performance testing and ANCOVA adjustment
- Population
- 213 patients with axial spondyloarthritis or psoriatic arthritis
- Primary outcome
- body composition phenotype against objective physical performance and daily physical activity
- Effect
- highest activity tertile: grip strength 45.3 kg (SD 13.0), gait speed 1.60 m/s (0.27), short physical performance battery 11.5 (1.0)
Sarcopenia has dominated the conversation about body composition in inflammatory arthritis. This single-centre cross-sectional study measured 213 patients with axial spondyloarthritis or psoriatic arthritis by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry alongside objective performance testing — grip strength, gait speed, the short physical performance battery — and a validated daily activity questionnaire.
The pattern was the reverse of the expectation. Physical performance was largely preserved across the cohort, obesity defined by body fat percentage was common, and sarcopenia was rare. Patients in the highest activity tertile had higher grip strength (45.3 kg), faster gait speed (1.60 m/s) and higher short physical performance battery scores (11.5), with a lower fat mass index and better muscle indices.
In adjusted models, daily physical activity remained independently associated with muscle-related composition, grip strength and the physical activity index, while the diagnosis itself — axial spondyloarthritis or psoriatic arthritis — showed no independent association. In sex-stratified analysis, men on tumour necrosis factor inhibitors had lower body fat and less obesity than men on conventional therapy, with no such difference in women.
The direction of causation is the obvious problem: this is cross-sectional, and patients who perform better are able to be more active, not necessarily made better by it. What the study does establish is where to look. Screening these patients for sarcopenia is looking for something rare; assessing adiposity and daily activity addresses what is common and what is associated with the performance differences actually observed. That reframing costs nothing and fits a routine review.
- Assess adiposity and daily physical activity at review rather than screening for sarcopenia, which was rare here
- Record an objective performance measure such as grip strength; it tracked with activity more closely than the diagnosis did
- Do not attribute poor performance to the arthritis subtype — diagnosis showed no independent association
- Read the association between activity and performance as bidirectional; this cannot show that activity improves performance
- Treat the difference seen in men on tumour necrosis factor inhibitors as an unconfirmed subgroup observation
Why it matters
The screening effort in these patients has been directed at the rare problem rather than the common one.
Don't overread it
Cross-sectional data cannot show that increasing physical activity improves performance or body composition in these patients.
The statistics, in plain English
Everything here is measured at one time point, so activity and performance cannot be separated as cause and effect: the patients walking faster are also the ones able to be more active. Adjusting for age, body mass index and diagnosis removes some confounding but not that. With 213 patients split into activity tertiles and then by sex, the subgroup findings rest on small numbers and should be treated as observations rather than results. Defining obesity by body fat percentage rather than body mass index is a strength, since it measures what was actually of interest.
Read the rest in the app
You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.
Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.
Tomorrow morning, before your first patient
One edition a day for rheumatology, written by the desk, every claim tied to its paper. Six minutes.
Get the app — free