Lee Smith1, Peter Allen2, Shahina Pardhan3, Trish Gorely4, Igor Grabovac5, Annetta Smith4, Guillermo F López-Sánchez6, Lin Yang7, Sarah E Jackson8. 1. The Cambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, CB1 1PT, Cambridge, UK. lee.smith@anglia.ac.uk. 2. Department of Vision and Hearing Sciences & Vision and Eye Research Unit, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK. 3. Vision and Eye Research Unit (VERU), Postgraduate Medical Institute, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK. 4. Department of Nursing, University of the Highlands and Islands, Inverness, UK. 5. Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Centre for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 6. Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain. 7. Department of Epidemiology, Centre for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 8. Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the association between self-rated eyesight and handgrip strength in a large, representative population of older adults. METHODS: Data were from 7433 older adults (≥52 years) participating in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Linear regression was used to analyze the association between self-rated eyesight and handgrip strength cross-sectionally in 2004/2005, and longitudinally over 4‑year follow-up, adjusting for a range of sociodemographic and health-related variables. RESULTS: In cross-sectional and prospective models, poor eyesight was strongly associated with lower handgrip strength after adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and body mass index (BMI, cross-sectional B = -1.39 kg, 95% confidence interval, CI -1.84 to -0.94, p < 0.001, prospective B = -0.68 kg, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.22, p = 0.004). The association was attenuated but remained statistically significant when health behaviours were included in the model (cross-sectional B = -0.93 kg, 95% CI -1.42 to -0.44, p < 0.001, prospective B = -0.50, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.02, p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Older adults in England with poor self-rated eyesight have lower levels of physical function compared with those with good eyesight. This association can be predominantly explained by differences in age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, BMI, and health behaviours, as well as chronic conditions, disability and depression.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the association between self-rated eyesight and handgrip strength in a large, representative population of older adults. METHODS: Data were from 7433 older adults (≥52 years) participating in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Linear regression was used to analyze the association between self-rated eyesight and handgrip strength cross-sectionally in 2004/2005, and longitudinally over 4‑year follow-up, adjusting for a range of sociodemographic and health-related variables. RESULTS: In cross-sectional and prospective models, poor eyesight was strongly associated with lower handgrip strength after adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and body mass index (BMI, cross-sectional B = -1.39 kg, 95% confidence interval, CI -1.84 to -0.94, p < 0.001, prospective B = -0.68 kg, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.22, p = 0.004). The association was attenuated but remained statistically significant when health behaviours were included in the model (cross-sectional B = -0.93 kg, 95% CI -1.42 to -0.44, p < 0.001, prospective B = -0.50, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.02, p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Older adults in England with poor self-rated eyesight have lower levels of physical function compared with those with good eyesight. This association can be predominantly explained by differences in age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, BMI, and health behaviours, as well as chronic conditions, disability and depression.
Authors: Diana G Taekema; Jacobijn Gussekloo; Andrea B Maier; Rudi G J Westendorp; Anton J M de Craen Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2010-03-10 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Rachel H Safeek; Katherine S Hall; Felipe Lobelo; Carlos Del Rio; Audrey L Khoury; Tammy Wong; Miriam C Morey; Mehri S McKellar Journal: AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses Date: 2018-09-20 Impact factor: 2.205
Authors: Graziano Onder; Brenda W J H Penninx; Luigi Ferrucci; Linda P Fried; Jack M Guralnik; Marco Pahor Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Kathleen A Turano; Aimee T Broman; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Beatriz Munoz; Gary S Rubin; Shelia West Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Lin Yang; Ai Koyanagi; Lee Smith; Liang Hu; Graham A Colditz; Adetunji T Toriola; Guillermo Felipe López Sánchez; Davy Vancampfort; Mark Hamer; Brendon Stubbs; Thomas Waldhör Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-06-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kam Chun Ho; Preeti Gupta; Eva K Fenwick; Ryan E K Man; Alfred T L Gan; Ecosse L Lamoureux Journal: J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 12.910