Sheena M Patel1, Kate A Duchowny1,2, Douglas P Kiel3, Rosaly Correa-de-Araujo4, Roger A Fielding5, Thomas Travison3, Jay Magaziner6, Todd Manini7, Qian-Li Xue8, Anne B Newman9, Karol M Pencina10, Adam J Santanasto9, Shalender Bhasin10, Peggy M Cawthon1,2. 1. California Pacific Medical Center, Research Institute, San Francisco, California. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 3. Department of Medicine Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew Senior Life, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. The National Institute on Aging, Bethesda, Maryland. 5. Nutrition, Exercise, Physiology, and Sarcopenia Laboratory, Jean Mayer U.S. Department of Agriculture Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 7. Department of Aging & Geriatric Research, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 8. Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology and Center on Aging and Health, Johns Hopkins Medical Institute, Baltimore, Maryland. 9. Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 10. Boston Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: The extent to which the prevalence of muscle weakness in the US population varies by different putative grip strength constructs developed by the Sarcopenia Definitions and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC) has not been described. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: Two nationally representative cohorts-2010 and 2012 waves of the Health and Retirement Survey and round 1 (2011) of the National Health and Aging Trends Survey. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 65 years and older (n = 12,984) were included in these analyses. MEASUREMENTS: We analyzed three constructs of muscle weakness developed by the SDOC, and found to be associated with mobility disability for men and women, respectively: absolute grip strength (<35.5 kg and 20 kg); grip strength standardized to body mass index (<1.05 kg/kg/m² and 0.79 kg/kg/m²); and grip strength standardized to weight (<0.45 kg/kg and 0.337 kg/kg). We estimated the prevalence of muscle weakness defined by each of these constructs in the overall older US population, and by age, sex, race, and ethnicity. We also estimated the sensitivity and specificity of each of the grip strength constructs to discriminate slowness (gait speed <0.8 m/s) in these samples. RESULTS: The prevalence of muscle weakness ranged from 23% to 61% for men and from 30% to 66% for women, depending on the construct used. There was substantial variation in the prevalence of muscle weakness by race and ethnicity. The sensitivity and specificity of these measures for discriminating slowness varied widely, ranging from 0.30 to 0.92 (sensitivity) and from 0.17 to 0.88 (specificity). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of muscle weakness, defined by the putative SDOC grip strength constructs, depends on the construct of weakness used. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1438-1444, 2020.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: The extent to which the prevalence of muscle weakness in the US population varies by different putative grip strength constructs developed by the Sarcopenia Definitions and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC) has not been described. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: Two nationally representative cohorts-2010 and 2012 waves of the Health and Retirement Survey and round 1 (2011) of the National Health and Aging Trends Survey. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 65 years and older (n = 12,984) were included in these analyses. MEASUREMENTS: We analyzed three constructs of muscle weakness developed by the SDOC, and found to be associated with mobility disability for men and women, respectively: absolute grip strength (<35.5 kg and 20 kg); grip strength standardized to body mass index (<1.05 kg/kg/m² and 0.79 kg/kg/m²); and grip strength standardized to weight (<0.45 kg/kg and 0.337 kg/kg). We estimated the prevalence of muscle weakness defined by each of these constructs in the overall older US population, and by age, sex, race, and ethnicity. We also estimated the sensitivity and specificity of each of the grip strength constructs to discriminate slowness (gait speed <0.8 m/s) in these samples. RESULTS: The prevalence of muscle weakness ranged from 23% to 61% for men and from 30% to 66% for women, depending on the construct used. There was substantial variation in the prevalence of muscle weakness by race and ethnicity. The sensitivity and specificity of these measures for discriminating slowness varied widely, ranging from 0.30 to 0.92 (sensitivity) and from 0.17 to 0.88 (specificity). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of muscle weakness, defined by the putative SDOC grip strength constructs, depends on the construct of weakness used. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1438-1444, 2020.
Authors: Lorenzo M Donini; Luca Busetto; Stephan C Bischoff; Tommy Cederholm; Maria D Ballesteros-Pomar; John A Batsis; Juergen M Bauer; Yves Boirie; Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Dror Dicker; Stefano Frara; Gema Frühbeck; Laurence Genton; Yftach Gepner; Andrea Giustina; Maria Cristina Gonzalez; Ho-Seong Han; Steven B Heymsfield; Takashi Higashiguchi; Alessandro Laviano; Andrea Lenzi; Ibolya Nyulasi; Edda Parrinello; Eleonora Poggiogalle; Carla M Prado; Javier Salvador; Yves Rolland; Ferruccio Santini; Mireille J Serlie; Hanping Shi; Cornel C Sieber; Mario Siervo; Roberto Vettor; Dennis T Villareal; Dorothee Volkert; Jianchun Yu; Mauro Zamboni; Rocco Barazzoni Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 4.807
Authors: Marian L Neuhouser; Rebecca P Hunt; Linda Van Horn; James M Shikany; Marcia L Stefanick; Karen C Johnson; Robert Brunner; Brad Cannell; Irene E Hatsu; Lesley F Tinker Journal: Prev Med Date: 2020-08-12 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Gregory J Grosicki; Thomas G Travison; Hao Zhu; Jay Magaziner; Ellen F Binder; Marco Pahor; Rosaly Correa-de-Araujo; Peggy M Cawthon; Shalender Bhasin; Denise Orwig; Susan Greenspan; Todd Manini; Joe Massaro; Adam Santanasto; Sheena Patel; Roger A Fielding Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-07-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Aron S Buchman; Sue E Leurgans; Tianhao Wang; Michal Schnaider-Beeri; Puja Agarwal; Robert J Dawe; Osvaldo Delbono; David A Bennett Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Anna K Stuck; Nina C Mäder; Dominic Bertschi; Andreas Limacher; Reto W Kressig Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-28 Impact factor: 3.390