Ryan McGrath1, Brian C Clark2,3,4, Matteo Cesari5,6, Carol Johnson7, Donald A Jurivich7,8. 1. Department of Health, Nutrition, and Exercise Sciences, North Dakota State University, NDSU Dept 2620, PO Box 6050, Fargo, ND, 58108, USA. ryan.mcgrath@ndsu.edu. 2. Ohio Musculoskeletal and Neurological Institute, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA. 3. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA. 4. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA. 5. Geriatric Unit, IRCCS Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, Milano, Italy. 6. Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Università di Milano, Milano, Italy. 7. Department of Geriatrics, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND, USA. 8. Sanford Health, Fargo, ND, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Examining handgrip strength (HGS) asymmetry could extend the utility of handgrip dynamometers for screening future falls. AIMS: We sought to determine the associations of HGS asymmetry on future falls in older Americans. METHODS: The analytic sample included 10,446 adults aged at least 65 years from the 2006-2016 waves of the Health and Retirement Study. Falls were self-reported. A handgrip dynamometer measured HGS. The highest HGS on each hand was used for determining HGS asymmetry ratio: (non-dominant HGS/dominant HGS). Those with HGS asymmetry ratio < 1.0 had their ratio inverted to make all HGS asymmetry ratios ≥ 1.0. Participants were categorized into asymmetry groups based on their inverted HGS asymmetry ratio: (1) 0.0-10.0%, (2) 10.1-20.0%, (3) 20.1-30.0%, and (4) > 30.0%. Generalized estimating equations were used for the analyses. RESULTS: Every 0.10 increase in HGS asymmetry ratio was associated with 1.26 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.48) greater odds for future falls. Relative to those with HGS asymmetry 0.0-10.0%, participants with HGS asymmetry > 30.0% had 1.15 (CI 1.01-1.33) greater odds for future falls; however, the associations were not significant for those with HGS asymmetry 10.1-20.0% (odds ratio: 1.06; CI 0.98-1.14) and 20.1-30.0% (odds ratio: 1.10; CI 0.99-1.22). Compared to those with HGS asymmetry 0.0-10.0%, participants with HGS asymmetry > 10.0% and > 20.0% had 1.07 (CI 1.01-1.16) and 1.12 (CI 1.02-1.22) greater odds for future falls, respectively. DISCUSSION: Asymmetric HGS, as a possible biomarker of impaired neuromuscular function, may help predict falls. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that HGS asymmetry be considered in HGS protocols and fall risk assessments.
BACKGROUND: Examining handgrip strength (HGS) asymmetry could extend the utility of handgrip dynamometers for screening future falls. AIMS: We sought to determine the associations of HGS asymmetry on future falls in older Americans. METHODS: The analytic sample included 10,446 adults aged at least 65 years from the 2006-2016 waves of the Health and Retirement Study. Falls were self-reported. A handgrip dynamometer measured HGS. The highest HGS on each hand was used for determining HGS asymmetry ratio: (non-dominant HGS/dominant HGS). Those with HGS asymmetry ratio < 1.0 had their ratio inverted to make all HGS asymmetry ratios ≥ 1.0. Participants were categorized into asymmetry groups based on their inverted HGS asymmetry ratio: (1) 0.0-10.0%, (2) 10.1-20.0%, (3) 20.1-30.0%, and (4) > 30.0%. Generalized estimating equations were used for the analyses. RESULTS: Every 0.10 increase in HGS asymmetry ratio was associated with 1.26 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.48) greater odds for future falls. Relative to those with HGS asymmetry 0.0-10.0%, participants with HGS asymmetry > 30.0% had 1.15 (CI 1.01-1.33) greater odds for future falls; however, the associations were not significant for those with HGS asymmetry 10.1-20.0% (odds ratio: 1.06; CI 0.98-1.14) and 20.1-30.0% (odds ratio: 1.10; CI 0.99-1.22). Compared to those with HGS asymmetry 0.0-10.0%, participants with HGS asymmetry > 10.0% and > 20.0% had 1.07 (CI 1.01-1.16) and 1.12 (CI 1.02-1.22) greater odds for future falls, respectively. DISCUSSION: Asymmetric HGS, as a possible biomarker of impaired neuromuscular function, may help predict falls. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that HGS asymmetry be considered in HGS protocols and fall risk assessments.
Authors: Charlotte Beaudart; Yves Rolland; Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Jürgen M Bauer; Cornel Sieber; Cyrus Cooper; Nasser Al-Daghri; Islene Araujo de Carvalho; Ivan Bautmans; Roberto Bernabei; Olivier Bruyère; Matteo Cesari; Antonio Cherubini; Bess Dawson-Hughes; John A Kanis; Jean-Marc Kaufman; Francesco Landi; Stefania Maggi; Eugene McCloskey; Jean Petermans; Leocadio Rodriguez Mañas; Jean-Yves Reginster; Regina Roller-Wirnsberger; Laura A Schaap; Daniel Uebelhart; René Rizzoli; Roger A Fielding Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2019-04-10 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Ryan McGrath; Grant R Tomkinson; Dain P LaRoche; Brenda M Vincent; Colin W Bond; Kyle J Hackney Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2020-06-28 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Matteo Cesari; Islene Araujo de Carvalho; Jotheeswaran Amuthavalli Thiyagarajan; Cyrus Cooper; Finbarr C Martin; Jean-Yves Reginster; Bruno Vellas; John R Beard Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2018-11-10 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Ryan McGrath; Terri L Blackwell; Kristine E Ensrud; Brenda M Vincent; Peggy M Cawthon Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Silvia Stagi; Alessia Moroni; Margherita Micheletti Cremasco; Elisabetta Marini Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 3.390