OBJECTIVE: To determine which component of leg power (maximal limb strength or limb velocity) is more influential on balance performance in mobility limited elders. DESIGN: In this cross-sectional analysis we evaluated 138 community-dwelling older adults with mobility limitation. Balance was measured using the Unipedal Stance Test, the Berg Balance Test (BERG), the Dynamic Gait Index, and the performance-oriented mobility assessment. We measured one repetition maximum strength and power at 40% one repetition maximum strength, from which velocity was calculated. The associations between maximal estimated leg strength and velocity with balance performance were examined using separate multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Strength was found to be associated [odds ratio of 1.06 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.11)] with performance on the Unipedal Stance Test, whereas velocity showed no statistically significant association. In contrast, velocity was consistently associated with performance on all composite measures of balance (BERG 14.23 [1.84-109.72], performance-oriented mobility assessment 33.92 [3.69-312.03], and Dynamic Gait Index 35.80 [4.77-268.71]). Strength was only associated with the BERG 1.08 (1.01-1.14). CONCLUSIONS: Higher leg press velocity is associated with better performance on the BERG, performance-oriented mobility assessment, and Dynamic Gait Index, whereas greater leg strength is associated with better performance on the Unipedal Stance Test and the BERG. These findings are likely related to the intrinsic qualities of each test and emphasize the relevance of limb velocity.
OBJECTIVE: To determine which component of leg power (maximal limb strength or limb velocity) is more influential on balance performance in mobility limited elders. DESIGN: In this cross-sectional analysis we evaluated 138 community-dwelling older adults with mobility limitation. Balance was measured using the Unipedal Stance Test, the Berg Balance Test (BERG), the Dynamic Gait Index, and the performance-oriented mobility assessment. We measured one repetition maximum strength and power at 40% one repetition maximum strength, from which velocity was calculated. The associations between maximal estimated leg strength and velocity with balance performance were examined using separate multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Strength was found to be associated [odds ratio of 1.06 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.11)] with performance on the Unipedal Stance Test, whereas velocity showed no statistically significant association. In contrast, velocity was consistently associated with performance on all composite measures of balance (BERG 14.23 [1.84-109.72], performance-oriented mobility assessment 33.92 [3.69-312.03], and Dynamic Gait Index 35.80 [4.77-268.71]). Strength was only associated with the BERG 1.08 (1.01-1.14). CONCLUSIONS: Higher leg press velocity is associated with better performance on the BERG, performance-oriented mobility assessment, and Dynamic Gait Index, whereas greater leg strength is associated with better performance on the Unipedal Stance Test and the BERG. These findings are likely related to the intrinsic qualities of each test and emphasize the relevance of limb velocity.
Authors: D G Thelen; M Muriuki; J James; A B Schultz; J A Ashton-Miller; N B Alexander Journal: J Electromyogr Kinesiol Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 2.368
Authors: Jonathan F Bean; Suzanne G Leveille; Dan K Kiely; Stephania Bandinelli; Jack M Guralnik; Luigi Ferrucci Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Stephanie Studenski; Subashan Perera; Dennis Wallace; Julie M Chandler; Pamela W Duncan; Earl Rooney; Michael Fox; Jack M Guralnik Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Jonathan F Bean; Dan K Kiely; Seth Herman; Suzanne G Leveille; Kelly Mizer; Walter R Frontera; Roger A Fielding Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Damien Callahan; Edward Phillips; Robert Carabello; Walter R Frontera; Roger A Fielding Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Bo Hu; Søren Thorgaard Skou; Barton L Wise; Glenn N Williams; Michael C Nevitt; Neil A Segal Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Julia C Thomas; Charles Odonkor; Laura Griffith; Nicole Holt; Sanja Percac-Lima; Suzanne Leveille; Pensheng Ni; Nancy K Latham; Alan M Jette; Jonathan F Bean Journal: Exp Gerontol Date: 2014-06-18 Impact factor: 4.032
Authors: Rachel E Ward; Marla K Beauchamp; Nancy K Latham; Suzanne G Leveille; Sanja Percac-Lima; Laura Kurlinski; Pengsheng Ni; Richard Goldstein; Alan M Jette; Jonathan F Bean Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-04-04 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Mini E Jacob; Thomas G Travison; Rachel E Ward; Nancy K Latham; Suzanne G Leveille; Alan M Jette; Jonathan F Bean Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 6.053