The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2015
Clinical Relevance of Different Handgrip Strength Indexes and Mobility Limitation in the Elderly Adults.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dong Renwei, Wang Xiuyang, Guo Qi, Wang Jiazhong, Zhang Wen, Shen Suxing, Han Peipei, Ma Yixuan, Kang Li, Wang Menglu, Fu Liyuan, Jia Liye, Wang Liancheng, Niu Kaijun
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: More efficient clinical indexes are needed to identify older people most likely to present mobility impairments. The aim of the present study was to determine which handgrip strength (HS) indexes are clinically relevant to detect risk of mobility limitation in the elderly adults. In addition, we attempted to determine an optimal cutoff point for the most relevant index.
METHODS: Data are from 469 men and 609 women aged 60 years and older recruited in the Hangu area of Tianjin, China. Participants scoring in the top 20% on the Timed Up and Go Test or in the slowest 20% for the 4-m walk test were defined as having mobility limitation.
RESULTS: The prevalence of mobility limitation was 27.6% in women and 24.5% in men. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for HS/body fat mass was 0.723 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.658-0.788) in men and for HS/weight was 0.684 (95% CI = 0.628-0.739) in women. These values were indicated higher levels of mobility limitation compared with HS and other relative HS indexes. The cutoffs of the most relevant index in men and women that effectively identified individuals at risk of mobility limitation were 1.884 and 0.281, respectively.
CONCLUSION: HS/body fat mass and HS/weight appear to be the indices best associated with mobility limitation for men and women, respectively. Optimal cutoffs for clinically relevant index have the potential to identify elderly adults at risk of mobility limitation.
METHODS: Data are from 469 men and 609 women aged 60 years and older recruited in the Hangu area of Tianjin, China. Participants scoring in the top 20% on the Timed Up and Go Test or in the slowest 20% for the 4-m walk test were defined as having mobility limitation.
RESULTS: The prevalence of mobility limitation was 27.6% in women and 24.5% in men. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for HS/body fat mass was 0.723 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.658-0.788) in men and for HS/weight was 0.684 (95% CI = 0.628-0.739) in women. These values were indicated higher levels of mobility limitation compared with HS and other relative HS indexes. The cutoffs of the most relevant index in men and women that effectively identified individuals at risk of mobility limitation were 1.884 and 0.281, respectively.
CONCLUSION: HS/body fat mass and HS/weight appear to be the indices best associated with mobility limitation for men and women, respectively. Optimal cutoffs for clinically relevant index have the potential to identify elderly adults at risk of mobility limitation.