CONTEXT: Studies developed the frail elderly handgrip strength (HGS) diagnostic criteria using multiple types of handgrip dynamometers. If different handgrip dynamometers report different values, then this would have the potential to misclassify people into the wrong diagnostic category. OBJECTIVE: To examine the characteristics of HGS measured by 2 standard handgrip dynamometers and to investigate the influence of hand size on HGS. SETTING: University research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 87 young and middle-aged adults between the ages of 20 and 60 years participated in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Standard methods of HGS measurements were used for hydraulic and Smedley spring-type dynamometers, although the participants were instructed to maintain an upright standing position in both tests. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability of hydraulic and Smedley dynamometers provided comparable results to that observed with previous studies. However, the difference in HGS between the 2 dynamometers (Hydraulic-Smedley difference) was positively associated (r = .670, P < .001) with the mean of the 2 dynamometers. The participants who had relatively low HGS (at least <35 kg) produced similar HGS values when the 2 dynamometers were compared, whereas persons who had relatively higher HGS (at least >45 kg) produced greater strength values with the hydraulic compared with the Smedley. The hand and palm lengths were weakly correlated (r = .349 and r = .358, respectively, both Ps < .001) with the difference in HGS between the 2 dynamometers. CONCLUSIONS: Test-retest reliability of hydraulic and Smedley dynamometers provides comparable results to previous studies. However, the difference in HGS between the 2 dynamometers was positively associated with the mean of the 2 dynamometers. This Hydraulic-Smedley difference would not affect persons who have relatively low HGS (at least <35 kg), while when HGS is relatively high, the comparison between dynamometers should be done with caution.
CONTEXT: Studies developed the frail elderly handgrip strength (HGS) diagnostic criteria using multiple types of handgrip dynamometers. If different handgrip dynamometers report different values, then this would have the potential to misclassify people into the wrong diagnostic category. OBJECTIVE: To examine the characteristics of HGS measured by 2 standard handgrip dynamometers and to investigate the influence of hand size on HGS. SETTING: University research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 87 young and middle-aged adults between the ages of 20 and 60 years participated in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Standard methods of HGS measurements were used for hydraulic and Smedley spring-type dynamometers, although the participants were instructed to maintain an upright standing position in both tests. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability of hydraulic and Smedley dynamometers provided comparable results to that observed with previous studies. However, the difference in HGS between the 2 dynamometers (Hydraulic-Smedley difference) was positively associated (r = .670, P < .001) with the mean of the 2 dynamometers. The participants who had relatively low HGS (at least <35 kg) produced similar HGS values when the 2 dynamometers were compared, whereas persons who had relatively higher HGS (at least >45 kg) produced greater strength values with the hydraulic compared with the Smedley. The hand and palm lengths were weakly correlated (r = .349 and r = .358, respectively, both Ps < .001) with the difference in HGS between the 2 dynamometers. CONCLUSIONS: Test-retest reliability of hydraulic and Smedley dynamometers provides comparable results to previous studies. However, the difference in HGS between the 2 dynamometers was positively associated with the mean of the 2 dynamometers. This Hydraulic-Smedley difference would not affect persons who have relatively low HGS (at least <35 kg), while when HGS is relatively high, the comparison between dynamometers should be done with caution.
Entities:
Keywords:
grip span; hand and palm length; hand strength; reliability; sarcopenia
Authors: Ryan McGrath; Grant R Tomkinson; Brian C Clark; Peggy M Cawthon; Matteo Cesari; Soham Al Snih; Donald A Jurivich; Kyle J Hackney Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2021-06-21 Impact factor: 4.669