|
Citation
|
McGrath R, Jurivich DA, Christensen BK, Choi BJ, Langford M, Rhee Y, Tomkinson GR, Hackney KJ. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2023; ePub(ePub): ePub. |
|
Abstract
|
BACKGROUND: Recently developed absolute and body size normalized handgrip strength (HGS) cut-points could be used individually and collectively to predict mobility problems and falls. AIMS: We examined the associations of (1) each absolute and normalized weakness cut-point, (2) collective weakness categories, and (3) changes in weakness status on future falls in older Americans.
METHODS: The analytic sample included 11,675 participants from the 2006-2018 waves of the Health and Retirement Study. Falls were self-reported. Men were classified as weak if their HGS was < 35.5-kg (absolute), < 0.45 kg/kg (body mass normalized), or < 1.05 kg/kg/m(2) (body mass index normalized). While, women were considered weak if their HGS was < 20.0-kg, < 0.337 kg/kg, or < 0.79 kg/kg/m(2). Collective weakness categorized those below 1, 2, or all 3 cut-points. The collective weakness categories were also used to observe changes in weakness status over time.
RESULTS: Older Americans below each absolute and normalized cut-point had greater odds for future falls: 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-1.32) for absolute weakness, 1.20 (CI 1.11-1.29) for body mass index normalized weakness, and 1.26 (CI 1.17-1.34) for body mass normalized weakness. Persons below 1, 2, or all 3 weakness cut-points had 1.17 (CI 1.07-1.27), 1.29 (CI 1.18-1.40), and 1.36 (CI 1.24-1.48) greater odds for future falls, respectively. Those in some changing weakness categories had greater odds for future falls: 1.26 (CI 1.08-1.48) for persistent and 1.31 (CI 1.11-1.55) for progressive.
DISCUSSION: Collectively using these weakness cut-points may improve their predictive value.
CONCLUSION: We recommend HGS be evaluated in mobility and fall risk assessments.
Language: en |