Evaluating handgrip strength and functional tests as indicators of gait speed in older females.

IF 2.3 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living Pub Date : 2025-01-27 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fspor.2025.1497546
Valentina Muollo, Samuel D'Emanuele, Laura Ghiotto, Doriana Rudi, Federico Schena, Cantor Tarperi
{"title":"Evaluating handgrip strength and functional tests as indicators of gait speed in older females.","authors":"Valentina Muollo, Samuel D'Emanuele, Laura Ghiotto, Doriana Rudi, Federico Schena, Cantor Tarperi","doi":"10.3389/fspor.2025.1497546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>With aging, females often experience greater declines in functional capacity [e.g., gait speed (GS)] compared to males, highlighting the need for sex-difference considered in screening and intervention planning. In certain contexts, assessing GS may not be feasible. Handgrip strength (HGS) commonly used as a surrogate measure for physical performance, also serves as an indirect indicator of muscle strength in the lower limbs. This cross-sectional study aims to investigate the associations between HGS and common functional tests and to determine the optimal cut-off values for these tests in assessing GS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>142 community-dwelling older females aged 60-80 years old (mean age: 75 ± 6 years) were evaluated with HGS, the 30-second arm curl (30 s-AC), 30-second chair stand (30 s-CS), the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and the 8-foot Up & Go (8-UG) test. Pearson's correlation (r) was used to assess the strength of associations between HGS and functional variables, while multiple linear regression models identified determinants of GS. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were employed to evaluate the effectiveness of various tests in detecting slow GS (<1.0 m/s), by means of the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>HGS showed positive significant (<i>p</i> < 0.001) associations with 30 s-AC (r = 0.499), SPPB (r = 0.447), and 30 s-CS (r = 0.329). Standardised coefficients of the linear models were: 30 s-AC (<i>β</i>=0.593), 30 s-CS (<i>β</i>=0.513), 5-CS (<i>β</i>=-0.431), and HGS (<i>β</i>=0.475) (all <i>p</i> < 0.001). ROC analysis revealed the following results: 30 s-AC (AUC = 0.80, cut-off=∼16 repetitions, sensitivity 83%, specificity 36%), 30 s-CS (AUC = 0.74; cut-off=∼13 repetitions, sensitivity 78%, specificity 64%), and 5-CS (AUC = 0.75, cut-off = 10.0 s, sensitivity 81%, specificity 57%), HGS (AUC = 0.73, cut-off=∼20 kg, sensitivity 79%, specificity 46%).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>We found that HGS was moderately-to-weakly associated with functional outcomes in older females, indicating that it may not reflect the overall body functional capacity. Despite similar AUCs across all tests, the 30 s-CS and 5-CS showed a better balance of sensitivity and specificity, making them potential indicators of slow GS compared to HGS and 30 s-AC.</p>","PeriodicalId":12716,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","volume":"7 ","pages":"1497546"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11807956/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2025.1497546","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: With aging, females often experience greater declines in functional capacity [e.g., gait speed (GS)] compared to males, highlighting the need for sex-difference considered in screening and intervention planning. In certain contexts, assessing GS may not be feasible. Handgrip strength (HGS) commonly used as a surrogate measure for physical performance, also serves as an indirect indicator of muscle strength in the lower limbs. This cross-sectional study aims to investigate the associations between HGS and common functional tests and to determine the optimal cut-off values for these tests in assessing GS.

Methods: 142 community-dwelling older females aged 60-80 years old (mean age: 75 ± 6 years) were evaluated with HGS, the 30-second arm curl (30 s-AC), 30-second chair stand (30 s-CS), the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and the 8-foot Up & Go (8-UG) test. Pearson's correlation (r) was used to assess the strength of associations between HGS and functional variables, while multiple linear regression models identified determinants of GS. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were employed to evaluate the effectiveness of various tests in detecting slow GS (<1.0 m/s), by means of the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity.

Results: HGS showed positive significant (p < 0.001) associations with 30 s-AC (r = 0.499), SPPB (r = 0.447), and 30 s-CS (r = 0.329). Standardised coefficients of the linear models were: 30 s-AC (β=0.593), 30 s-CS (β=0.513), 5-CS (β=-0.431), and HGS (β=0.475) (all p < 0.001). ROC analysis revealed the following results: 30 s-AC (AUC = 0.80, cut-off=∼16 repetitions, sensitivity 83%, specificity 36%), 30 s-CS (AUC = 0.74; cut-off=∼13 repetitions, sensitivity 78%, specificity 64%), and 5-CS (AUC = 0.75, cut-off = 10.0 s, sensitivity 81%, specificity 57%), HGS (AUC = 0.73, cut-off=∼20 kg, sensitivity 79%, specificity 46%).

Discussion: We found that HGS was moderately-to-weakly associated with functional outcomes in older females, indicating that it may not reflect the overall body functional capacity. Despite similar AUCs across all tests, the 30 s-CS and 5-CS showed a better balance of sensitivity and specificity, making them potential indicators of slow GS compared to HGS and 30 s-AC.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
459
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信