握力数字测功机评估老年人握力的效度与信度。

IF 3.3 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Frontiers in aging Pub Date : 2025-04-25 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fragi.2025.1560097
Gabriela Benatti de Oliveira, Lara Vilar Fernandes, Teresa F Amaral, Ana Carolina Junqueira Vasques, Ligiana Pires Corona
{"title":"握力数字测功机评估老年人握力的效度与信度。","authors":"Gabriela Benatti de Oliveira, Lara Vilar Fernandes, Teresa F Amaral, Ana Carolina Junqueira Vasques, Ligiana Pires Corona","doi":"10.3389/fragi.2025.1560097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>With the advancement of studies on the importance of sarcopenia in the aging process, new technologies have been developed to assess muscle mass and function. However, most research on portable devices has not considered a wide range of ages and clinical conditions. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of the Gripwise digital dynamometer in measuring handgrip strength in older Brazilian adults, comparing its performance with the widely used Saehan device.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted with 149 participants (32 men and 117 women), with an average age of 69.5 years. Handgrip strength was measured using both the Gripwise and Saehan dynamometers. Reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Analyses considered three handgrip strength measurements from both devices, as well as the highest value obtained. The classification of dynapenia (low muscle strength) was compared using different cutoff points proposed by Villain et al. (2023), Spexoto et al. (2022), and Cruz-Jentoft et al. (2019).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both dynamometers demonstrated excellent reliability, with ICC values above 0.90. However, significant differences in mean handgrip strength values were observed between the devices (approximately 3.5-four kgf). These variations impacted the classification of dynapenia, with the Gripwise identifying more cases of low muscle strength compared to Saehan.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The lower values reported by the Gripwise may impact clinical decision-making in two ways. On one hand, lower values may lead to earlier detection of muscle weakness, allowing for quicker intervention in individuals with strength below typical thresholds. However, this could also result in an overestimation of the prevalence of dynapenia if the values do not accurately reflect true muscle strength, which could lead to unnecessary interventions. Therefore, it is crucial to consider the need for adjustments in the cutoff points when using Gripwise. These findings highlight the need to revise cutoff points for dynapenia classification, considering device variations and model differences in older age groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":73061,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in aging","volume":"6 ","pages":"1560097"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12062132/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity and reliability of Gripwise digital dynamometer in the assessment of handgrip strength in older adults.\",\"authors\":\"Gabriela Benatti de Oliveira, Lara Vilar Fernandes, Teresa F Amaral, Ana Carolina Junqueira Vasques, Ligiana Pires Corona\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fragi.2025.1560097\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>With the advancement of studies on the importance of sarcopenia in the aging process, new technologies have been developed to assess muscle mass and function. However, most research on portable devices has not considered a wide range of ages and clinical conditions. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of the Gripwise digital dynamometer in measuring handgrip strength in older Brazilian adults, comparing its performance with the widely used Saehan device.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted with 149 participants (32 men and 117 women), with an average age of 69.5 years. Handgrip strength was measured using both the Gripwise and Saehan dynamometers. Reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Analyses considered three handgrip strength measurements from both devices, as well as the highest value obtained. The classification of dynapenia (low muscle strength) was compared using different cutoff points proposed by Villain et al. (2023), Spexoto et al. (2022), and Cruz-Jentoft et al. (2019).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both dynamometers demonstrated excellent reliability, with ICC values above 0.90. However, significant differences in mean handgrip strength values were observed between the devices (approximately 3.5-four kgf). These variations impacted the classification of dynapenia, with the Gripwise identifying more cases of low muscle strength compared to Saehan.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The lower values reported by the Gripwise may impact clinical decision-making in two ways. On one hand, lower values may lead to earlier detection of muscle weakness, allowing for quicker intervention in individuals with strength below typical thresholds. However, this could also result in an overestimation of the prevalence of dynapenia if the values do not accurately reflect true muscle strength, which could lead to unnecessary interventions. Therefore, it is crucial to consider the need for adjustments in the cutoff points when using Gripwise. These findings highlight the need to revise cutoff points for dynapenia classification, considering device variations and model differences in older age groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in aging\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"1560097\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12062132/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in aging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fragi.2025.1560097\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in aging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fragi.2025.1560097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导论:随着对肌肉减少症在衰老过程中的重要性研究的深入,开发了新的技术来评估肌肉质量和功能。然而,大多数关于便携式设备的研究并没有考虑到广泛的年龄和临床条件。本研究旨在评估Gripwise数字测力仪在测量巴西老年人握力方面的可靠性,并将其性能与广泛使用的Saehan设备进行比较。方法:采用横断面研究方法,纳入149名参与者(男性32人,女性117人),平均年龄69.5岁。握力测量使用Gripwise和Saehan测力仪。采用类内相关系数(ICC)评估信度。分析考虑了两种设备的三种握力测量,以及获得的最高值。使用Villain et al.(2023)、Spexoto et al.(2022)和Cruz-Jentoft et al.(2019)提出的不同截止点对动力不足(低肌肉力量)的分类进行比较。结果:两种测功机均具有良好的可靠性,ICC值均在0.90以上。然而,在设备之间观察到平均握力值的显着差异(约3.5- 4 kgf)。这些变化影响了动力不足的分类,与Saehan相比,Gripwise识别出更多的低肌肉力量病例。结论:Gripwise报告的较低值可能从两个方面影响临床决策。一方面,较低的值可能导致更早发现肌肉无力,允许更快的干预个体力量低于典型阈值。然而,如果这些值不能准确反映真实的肌肉力量,这也可能导致对动力不足患病率的高估,从而导致不必要的干预。因此,在使用Gripwise时,考虑是否需要调整截止点是至关重要的。这些发现强调需要修改动力缺失分类的截止点,考虑到老年群体的设备变化和模型差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validity and reliability of Gripwise digital dynamometer in the assessment of handgrip strength in older adults.

Introduction: With the advancement of studies on the importance of sarcopenia in the aging process, new technologies have been developed to assess muscle mass and function. However, most research on portable devices has not considered a wide range of ages and clinical conditions. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of the Gripwise digital dynamometer in measuring handgrip strength in older Brazilian adults, comparing its performance with the widely used Saehan device.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 149 participants (32 men and 117 women), with an average age of 69.5 years. Handgrip strength was measured using both the Gripwise and Saehan dynamometers. Reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Analyses considered three handgrip strength measurements from both devices, as well as the highest value obtained. The classification of dynapenia (low muscle strength) was compared using different cutoff points proposed by Villain et al. (2023), Spexoto et al. (2022), and Cruz-Jentoft et al. (2019).

Results: Both dynamometers demonstrated excellent reliability, with ICC values above 0.90. However, significant differences in mean handgrip strength values were observed between the devices (approximately 3.5-four kgf). These variations impacted the classification of dynapenia, with the Gripwise identifying more cases of low muscle strength compared to Saehan.

Conclusion: The lower values reported by the Gripwise may impact clinical decision-making in two ways. On one hand, lower values may lead to earlier detection of muscle weakness, allowing for quicker intervention in individuals with strength below typical thresholds. However, this could also result in an overestimation of the prevalence of dynapenia if the values do not accurately reflect true muscle strength, which could lead to unnecessary interventions. Therefore, it is crucial to consider the need for adjustments in the cutoff points when using Gripwise. These findings highlight the need to revise cutoff points for dynapenia classification, considering device variations and model differences in older age groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 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