| Literature DB >> 35468923 |
JuHee Lee1, Yujin Suh2, Jungah Park3, Go-Un Kim4, Sumi Lee5.
Abstract
Older adults commonly experience concurrent lower handgrip strength and sensory impairment. However, previous studies have analyzed the individual effects of either handgrip strength or sensory impairment on cognitive impairment. To address this gap, this study investigated the combined effects of handgrip strength and sensory impairment on cognitive impairment among older adults. In total, 2930 participants aged 65 and older were analyzed using 2014-2018 data from the Korean Longitudinal Study of Aging. Participants underwent assessments of handgrip strength (grip dynamometer), sensory impairment (self-reported responses), and cognitive impairment (Korean version of the Mini-Mental State Examination). Low handgrip strength, compared to normal handgrip strength, was associated with cognitive impairment. In participants with low handgrip strength, vision and hearing impairment were associated with cognitive impairment (odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.75; OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.77-3.78, respectively) compared to those with normal handgrip strength. Participants with low handgrip strength and dual sensory impairment had the highest OR for cognitive impairment (OR 3.73, 95% CI 2.65-5.25). Due to the strong association of low handgrip strength and dual sensory impairment with cognitive impairment, people living with low handgrip strength and dual sensory impairment should be classified as a high-risk group for cognitive impairment and should be prioritized for interventions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35468923 PMCID: PMC9039062 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-10635-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Demographic characteristics of the participants stratified by handgrip strength status and type of sensory impairment at baseline.
| Variable | Total (n = 2930) | Normal handgrip strength (n = 1656) | Low handgrip strength (n = 1274) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NI (n = 1263) | VI (n = 290) | HI (n = 73) | DI (n = 30) | NI (n = 766) | VI (n = 316) | HI (n = 79) | DI (n = 113) | ||||
| Age, mean (SD) | 73.5 ± 6.1 | 71.4 ± 5.2 | 72.2 ± 5.2 | 73.9 ± 5.5 | 76.0 ± 5.3 | *** | 74.5 ± 6.0 | 76.3 ± 6.1 | 78.7 ± 6.0 | 80.2 ± 6.3 | *** |
| Female, n (%) | 1599 (54.6%) | 650 (51.5%) | 163 (56.2%) | 27 (37.0%) | 13 (43.3%) | * | 411 (53.7%) | 229 (72.5%) | 45 (57.0%) | 61 (54.0%) | *** |
| Primary school or less, n (%) | 1671 (57.0%) | 595 (47.1%) | 173 (59.7%) | 34 (46.6%) | 17 (56.7%) | ** | 454 (59.3%) | 249 (78.8%) | 59 (74.7%) | 90 (79.6%) | *** |
| Married, n (%) | 2116 (72.2%) | 990 (78.4%) | 210 (72.4%) | 61 (83.6%) | 20 (66.7%) | * | 544 (71.0%) | 173 (54.7%) | 56 (70.9%) | 62 (54.9%) | *** |
| K-MMSE, mean (SD) | 24.9 ± 5.0 | 26.6 ± 3.6 | 24.6 ± 4.8 | 24.8 ± 4.1 | 23.3 ± 5.8 | *** | 24.6 ± 4.8 | 22.3 ± 5.4 | 20.6 ± 6.7 | 18.3 ± 6.2 | *** |
Analyzed using available data, including missing data. P value for the Pearson chi-square test for group comparisons of types of sensory impairment within each group of handgrip strength.
DI dual sensory impairment, HI hearing impairment only, K-MMSE Korean version of Mini-Mental State Examination, NI no sensory impairment, SD standard deviation, VI vision impairment only.
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
The prevalence of cognitive impairment stratified by handgrip strength status and type of sensory impairment by follow-up period.
| Period | Total (n = 2930) | Normal handgrip strength (n = 1656) | Low handgrip strength (n = 1274) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NI (n = 1263) | VI (n = 290) | HI (n = 73) | DI (n = 30) | NI (n = 766) | VI (n = 316) | HI (n = 79) | DI (n = 113) | ||||
| At baseline, n (%) | 472 (16.1%) | 106 (8.4%) | 48 (16.6%) | 17 (23.3%) | 9 (30.0%) | *** | 123 (16.1%) | 79 (25.0%) | 31 (39.2%) | 59 (52.2%) | *** |
| At follow-up 2 years, n (%) | 575 (19.6%) | 133 (10.5%) | 61 (21.0%) | 23 (31.5%) | 7 (23.3%) | *** | 161 (21.0%) | 89 (28.2%) | 37 (46.8%) | 64 (56.6%) | *** |
| At follow-up 4 years, n (%) | 615 (21.0%) | 175 (13.9%) | 62 (21.4%) | 28 (38.4%) | 13 (43.3%) | *** | 150 (19.6%) | 97 (30.7%) | 32 (40.5%) | 58 (51.3%) | *** |
Analyzed using available data, including missing data. P value for the Pearson chi-square test for group comparisons of types of sensory impairment within each group of handgrip strength.
DI dual sensory impairment, HI hearing impairment only, NI no sensory impairment, VI vision impairment only.
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Figure 1Prevalence of cognitive impairment stratified by handgrip strength status and type of sensory impairment by follow-up period. DI dual sensory impairment, HI hearing impairment only, NI no sensory impairment, VI vision impairment only.
Adjusted odds ratios of sensory impairment for the prevalence of cognitive impairment according to handgrip strength status using generalized estimating equations.
| Type of sensory impairment | Normal handgrip strength (n = 1656) | Low handgrip strength (n = 1274) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | |||
| NI | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| VI | 1.92 (1.46, 2.53) | < 0.001 | 1.36 (1.06, 1.75) | 0.016 |
| HI | 3.46 (2.33, 5.12) | < 0.001 | 2.58 (1.77, 3.78) | < 0.001 |
| DI | 3.64 (1.69, 7.84) | 0.001 | 3.73 (2.65, 5.25) | < 0.001 |
Adjusted for age, sex, education level, marital status, physical activity, smoking, drinking alcohol, body mass index, number of comorbidity and depressive symptoms.
CI confidence interval, DI dual sensory impairment, HI hearing impairment only, NI no sensory impairment, OR odds ratio, VI vision impairment only.
Figure 2Forest plots of adjusted odds ratios of sensory impairment for the prevalence of cognitive impairment according to handgrip strength status. The adjusted odds ratios were shown as the squares, and the horizontal lines across the square represents for the 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Adjusted for age, gender, education level, marital status, physical activity, smoking, drinking alcohol, body mass index, number of comorbidity and depressive symptoms. CI confidence interval, DI dual sensory impairment, HI hearing impairment only, NI no sensory impairment, VI vision impairment only.
Figure 3Flow of the selection process for this study sample. KLoSA Korean Longitudinal Study of Aging.