Department of Health, Nutrition, and Exercise Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota, USA.
California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco Coordinating Center, San Francisco, California, USA.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020 Sep;68(9):2051-2058. doi: 10.1111/jgs.16556. Epub 2020 May 30.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Examining handgrip strength (HGS) asymmetry and weakness together may extend the predictive capacity of HGS for capturing possible health problems such as cognitive impairment. The purpose of this study was to determine the associations of HGS asymmetry and weakness on lower cognitive functioning in a national sample of aging Americans.
Longitudinal panel.
Participant residences.
The analytic sample included 17,163 Americans aged 65.0 years (standard deviation = 10.1 years) who participated in the 2006 to 2016 waves of the Health and Retirement Study (HRS).
A handgrip dynamometer was used to measure HGS; weakness was defined as HGS below 26 kg (men) or below 16 kg (women). Persons with HGS above 10% stronger on either hand were considered as having any HGS asymmetry. Those with HGS that was more than 10% stronger on their dominant or nondominant hand were considered as having dominant or nondominant HGS asymmetry, respectively. The Telephone Interview of Cognitive Status determined lower cognitive functioning (≤11 for ages 50-64 years; ≤10 for ages ≥65 years). Covariate-adjusted linear mixed-effects models analyzed the associations of each HGS asymmetry and weakness group on lower cognitive functioning.
Relative to those with symmetric HGS and no weakness, each HGS asymmetry and weakness group had greater odds for lower cognitive functioning: 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-1.27) for any HGS asymmetry alone, 1.64 (95% CI = 1.21-2.23) for weakness alone, and 1.95 (95% CI = 1.51-2.53) for any HGS asymmetry and weakness. Each HGS asymmetry dominance and weakness group also had greater odds for lower cognitive functioning: 1.12 (95% CI = 1.01-1.25) for asymmetric dominant HGS alone, 1.27 (95% CI = 1.05-1.53) for asymmetric nondominant HGS alone, 1.64 (95% CI = 1.21-2.23) for weakness alone, 1.89 (95% CI = 1.39-2.57) for weakness and asymmetric dominant HGS, and 2.10 (95% CI = 1.37-3.20) for weakness and asymmetric nondominant HGS.
The presence of both HGS asymmetry and weakness may predict accelerated declines in cognitive functioning.
背景/目的：同时检查握力强度（HGS）的不对称性和减弱可能会扩展 HGS 对捕获认知障碍等潜在健康问题的预测能力。本研究的目的是确定 HGS 不对称性和减弱与美国老龄化人群中较低认知功能的关联。
纵向面板。
参与者居住地。
分析样本包括 17163 名年龄为 65.0 岁（标准差=10.1 岁）的美国人，他们参加了 2006 年至 2016 年的健康与退休研究（HRS）。
使用握力测力计测量 HGS；强度减弱定义为 HGS 低于 26 公斤（男性）或低于 16 公斤（女性）。手更强壮的人被认为具有任何 HGS 不对称性。那些在优势或非优势手上的 HGS 强度超过 10%的人被认为具有优势或非优势 HGS 不对称性。电话认知状态访谈确定了较低的认知功能（50-64 岁时≤11；65 岁以上时≤10）。调整协变量的线性混合效应模型分析了每个 HGS 不对称和减弱组与较低认知功能的关联。
与具有对称 HGS 和无减弱的人相比，每个 HGS 不对称和减弱组的认知功能较低的几率更大：1.15（95%置信区间[CI]为 1.03-1.27）仅存在 HGS 不对称性，1.64（95%CI=1.21-2.23）单独存在弱点，以及 1.95（95%CI=1.51-2.53）对于任何 HGS 不对称性和弱点。每个 HGS 不对称优势和弱点组的认知功能也较低：1.12（95%CI=1.01-1.25）仅存在优势 HGS 不对称性，1.27（95%CI=1.05-1.53）仅存在非优势 HGS 不对称性，1.64（95%CI=1.21-2.23）单独存在弱点，1.89（95%CI=1.39-2.57）对于弱点和优势 HGS 不对称性，以及 2.10（95%CI=1.37-3.20）对于弱点和非优势 HGS 不对称性。
HGS 不对称性和减弱的存在可能预示着认知功能的加速下降。
