Cited by 193Nutrition and Health in AgingMuscle metabolism and nutritionFrailty in Older Adults

Protein supplementation improves muscle mass and physical performance in undernourished prefrail and frail elderly subjects: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Open access
Park, Yongsoon, Choi, Jeong-Eun, Hwang, Hwan-Sik·2018·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background Age-related loss of muscle mass and function is a major component of frailty. Nutrition supplementation with exercise is an effective strategy to decrease frailty by preventing sarcopenia, but the effect of protein alone is controversial.Objective The present study was performed to investigate a dose-dependent effect of protein supplementation on muscle mass and frailty in prefrail or frail malnourished elderly people.Design A 12-wk double-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted in elderly subjects aged 70-85 y with ≥1 of the Cardiovascular Health Study frailty criteria and a Mini Nutritional Assessment score ≤23.5 (n = 120). Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: 0.8, 1.2, or 1.5 g protein · kg-1 · d-1, with concealed allocation and intention-to-treat analysis. Primary outcomes were appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM) and skeletal muscle mass index (SMI) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.Results After the 12-wk intervention, the 1.5-g protein · kg-1 · d-1 group had higher ASM (mean ± SD: 0.52 ± 0.64 compared with 0.08 ± 0.68 kg, P = 0.036) and SMI (ASM/weight: 0.87% ± 0.69% compared with 0.15% ± 0.89%, P = 0.039; ASM/BMI: 0.02 ± 0.03 compared with 0.00 ± 0.04, P = 0.033; ASM:fat ratio: 0.04 ± 0.11 compared with -0.02 ± 0.10, P = 0.025) than the 0.8-g protein · kg-1 · d-1 group. In addition, gait speed was improved in the 1.5-g protein · kg-1 · d-1 group compared with the 0.8-g protein · kg-1 · d-1 group (0.09 ± 0.07 compared with 0.04 ± 0.07 m/s, P = 0.039). There were no significant differences between the 1.2- and 0.8-g protein · kg-1 · d-1 groups in muscle mass and physical performance. No harmful adverse effects were observed.Conclusions The present study indicates that protein intake of 1.5 g · kg-1 · d-1 has the most beneficial effects in regard to preventing sarcopenia and frailty compared with protein intakes of 0.8 and 1.2 g · kg-1 · d-1 in prefrail or frail elderly subjects at risk of malnutrition. This trial was registered at cris.nih.go.kr as KCT0001923.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ajcn/nqy214

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Park, Y., Choi, J.-E., & Hwang, H.-S.
Affiliations
Hanyang University (KR)
Corresponding author
Park, Yongsoon
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
108
Issue
5
Pages
1026-1033
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2900982893
Cited by
193
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
FWCI
10.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (HI15C3207)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
Keywords
protein supplementation, frailty, pre-frailty, sarcopenia, muscle mass, skeletal muscle index, malnutrition, older adults, walking speed, physical performance, dose-response relationship, appendicular skeletal muscle mass, Mini Nutritional Assessment, dietary intervention, exercise training, functional capacity, quality of life, body composition
MeSH terms
Frailty, Physical Functional Performance, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Composition, Dietary Proteins, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Nutritional Status, Nutrition Assessment, Frail Elderly, Muscle, Skeletal, Dietary Supplements, Malnutrition, Sarcopenia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review