| Literature DB >> 34215205 |
Yang Cheng1, Min Liu2, Yu Liu2, Haifeng Xu2, Xiaotian Chen3, Hui Zheng1, Xiaojun Wu4, Zhixiang Shen5, Chong Shen6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Poor physical function is strongly associated with mortality and poor clinical outcomes in adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Handgrip strength (HGS) is an important index for physical function in the general population, and the association between HGS and CKD is worth investigating.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese community-dwelling persons; Handgrip strength; chronic kidney disease
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34215205 PMCID: PMC8252238 DOI: 10.1186/s12882-021-02452-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Nephrol ISSN: 1471-2369 Impact factor: 2.388
General characteristics of the subjects included in the study
| Variables c | All subjects( | Sex-specific tertiles of handgrip strength | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18–95 | 20–95 | 18–87 | 20–85 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 4,084(39.24) | 1,351(39.18) | 1,365(39.21) | 1,368(39.33) | 0.991 | 0.898 | |
| 6,323(60.76) | 2,097(60.82) | 2,116(60.79) | 2,110(60.67) | |||
| 24.75(22.55–27.06) | 24.26(21.93–26.81) | 24.64(22.48–26.94) | 25.31 (23.20-27.45) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 31.55(27.92–37.92) | 30.61(26.95–35.90) | 32.07(28.36–38.96) | 32.68(28.45–39.29) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 2,311(22.21) | 689(19.98) | 778(22.35) | 844(24.27) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 2,880(27.67) | 808(23.43) | 966(27.75) | 1,106(31.80) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 6,185(59.43) | 2,348(68.10) | 2,027(58.23) | 1,810(52.04) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 1,795(17.25) | 711(20.62) | 576(16.55) | 508(14.61) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 3453(33.18) | 1378(39.97) | 1135(32.61) | 940(27.03) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 863(8.29) | 351(10.18) | 308(8.85) | 204(5.87) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 1.48(1.23–1.76) | 1.51(1.25–1.79) | 1.49(1.25–1.78) | 1.43(1.18–1.70) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 2.82(2.34–3.35) | 2.80(2.29–3.33) | 2.85(2.37–3.36) | 2.81(2.34–3.35) | 0.019 | 0.041 | |
| 1.30(0.94–1.79) | 1.27(0.94–1.79) | 1.30(0.93–1.85) | 1.35(0.96–1.99) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 5.03(4.46–5.65) | 5.02(4.46–5.09) | 5.06(4.49–5.67) | 5.02(4.44–5.65) | 0.053 | 0.001 | |
| 94.62(83.33-105.94) | 87.62(77.10-99.39) | 94.76(84.24-105.13) | 101.03(89.89-111.05) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 412(3.96) | 301(8.73) | 87(2.50) | 24(0.69) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
a Comparisons between groups analyzed by ANOVA or Kruskal–Wallis test for continuous variables ; and Chi-squared test was used to examine the differences for categorical variables;
b P for trend was calculated through Cochran-Armitage test or linear regression analyses
cBMI Body mass index; PAI Physical Activity Index; HDL-C high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG serum triglyceride; TC total cholesterol; eGFR estimated glomerular filtration rate; CKD chronic kidney disease
Fig. 1Age-related distribution of handgrip strength stratified by sex. Lines in different colors indicate the percentile as denoted (10-90th percentiles)
Fig. 2The mean values of handgrip strength according to categories of eGFR. Error bars represent 95 % confidence intervals. (A) For men under the age of 50; (B) for men aged 50 and above; (C) for women under the age of 50; (D) for women aged 50 and above
Odds ratio and 95 % CI for CKD according to tertiles of handgrip strength
| Characteristics | Sample | Handgrip strength | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 412/9,995 | Ref | 0.64(0.49–0.83) | 0.37(0.23–0.58) | |
| Gender | ||||
| Men | 189/3,895 | Ref | 0.61(0.41–0.90) | 0.31(0.14–0.60) |
| Women | 223/6,100 | Ref | 0.67(0.46–0.96) | 0.44(0.23–0.77) |
| Ref | 0.35(0.27–0.44) | 0.13(0.08–0.19) | ||
| Men | 188/3,231 | Ref | 0.34(0.23–0.49) | 0.12(0.06–0.21) |
| Women | 221/4,750 | Ref | 0.35 (0.25–0.50) | 0.14(0.08–0.24) |
| Yes | 86/1,760 | Ref | 0.58(0.33–1.01) | 0.29(0.12–0.66) |
| No | 326/8,235 | Ref | 0.65(0.47–0.88) | 0.40(0.23–0.66) |
| Low PAI | 308/4,892 | Ref | 0.52(0.37–0.73) | 0.57(0.33–0.93) |
| High PAI | 104/5,103 | Ref | 0.86(0.55–1.33) | 0.14(0.04–0.36) |
| Yes | 79/2,232 | Ref | 0.62(0.34–1.09) | 0.17(0.39–0.50) |
| No | 333/7,763 | Ref | 0.64(0.47–0.86) | 0.44(0.26–0.70) |
| Yes | 72/2,808 | Ref | 0.79(0.44–1.38) | 0.18(0.04–0.52) |
| No | 340/7,187 | Ref | 0.59(0.44–0.80) | 0.44(0.26–0.70) |
| Yes | 358/5,827 | Ref | 0.56(0.42–0.75) | 0.36(0.22–0.57) |
| No | 54/4,168 | Ref | 1.52(0.74–3.09) | 0.51(0.11–1.64) |
| Yes | 122/1,673 | Ref | 0.57(0.36–0.90) | 0.18(0.06–0.43) |
| No | 290/8,322 | Ref | 0.69(0.49–0.95) | 0.50(0.29–0.82) |
a Entire represent one category increase of HGS
b Adjusted for age, sex, BMI, smoking, drinking, physical activity index (PAI), history of chronic diseases, HDL, LDL, TG