Feng Wenjing, Ma Mingfeng, Gao Hanshu, Yuan Wei, Li Ruixue, Guo Hui, Gu Cuiying, Sun Zhaoqing, Zhang Yao, Zheng Liqiang
Ministry of Education-Shanghai Key Laboratory of Children's Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Front Aging Neurosci. 2023 May 19;15:1191197. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2023.1191197. eCollection 2023.
Recently, the association between handgrip strength (HGS) asymmetry and cognition has been revealed, but evidences are still scarce. Particularly, the association between asymmetric HGS and cognitive performance in various cognitive domains is unclear and whether this association is stable across ethnic groups is unknown.
The population was from a longitudinal study in rural areas of Fuxin, Liaoning, China. The Chinese version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic (MOCA-BC) was used to evaluate the cognitive function. The HGS ratio was calculated as maximal non-dominant HGS divided by maximal dominant HGS. HGS ratio <0.9 or >1.1 was classified as asymmetric dominant/non-dominant HGS, respectively. Generalized linear models were used to analyze the relationship between asymmetric HGS and cognitive function adjusted for HGS, handedness, wave, age, sex, education, ethnicity, smoking, drinking, physical labor level, BMI, hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia.
A total of 2,969 participants ≥50 years were included in this study. Adjusted for HGS and other confunding variables, there was an inverted U-shaped association between HGS ratio and MoCA-BC scores ( = 0.004). The association between HGS ratio and MoCA-BC scores was inconsistent among ethnic groups ( = 0.048). In Han, only asymmetric non-dominant HGS was associated with lower cognitive scores [β = -0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.26 ∼-0.08, = 0.027]; in Mongolians, asymmetric dominant HGS(β = -0.60, 95% CI: -1.35 ∼ 0.15, = 0.115) and asymmetric non-dominant HGS (β = -0.56, 95% CI: -1.42 ∼ 0.31, = 0.206) were all associated with lower cognitive scores, although no statistical significance was found. Asymmetric non-dominant HGS and lower HGS, but not asymmetric dominant HGS were all independently associated with impairment of Delayed Recall (OR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.05 ∼ 1.74; OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.01 ∼ 1.21) and Fluency (OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.15 ∼ 1.78; OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.02 ∼ 1.19). Both asymmetric dominant HGS (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.07 ∼ 1.67) and lower HGS (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.10 ∼ 1.32) were associated with impairment of visuoperception.
HGS and HGS asymmetry were all independently related to lower global cognitive performance. The association between HGS asymmetry and cognitive function varies among ethnic groups.
最近，握力（HGS）不对称与认知之间的关联已被揭示，但证据仍然稀少。特别是，不对称HGS与各个认知领域认知表现之间的关联尚不清楚，且这种关联在不同种族群体中是否稳定也未知。
研究人群来自中国辽宁省阜新农村地区的一项纵向研究。使用中文版蒙特利尔认知评估基础版（MOCA-BC）评估认知功能。HGS比值计算为非优势手最大HGS除以优势手最大HGS。HGS比值<0.9或>1.1分别被分类为优势/非优势HGS不对称。使用广义线性模型分析不对称HGS与认知功能之间的关系，并对HGS、利手、波次、年龄、性别、教育程度、种族、吸烟、饮酒、体力劳动水平、BMI、高血压、糖尿病和血脂异常进行了校正。
本研究共纳入2969名年龄≥50岁的参与者。在校正HGS和其他混杂变量后，HGS比值与MoCA-BC评分之间存在倒U形关联（P = 0.004）。HGS比值与MoCA-BC评分之间的关联在不同种族群体中不一致（P = 0.048）。在汉族中，只有非优势HGS不对称与较低的认知评分相关[β = -0.67，95%置信区间（CI）：-（此处原文有误，应是 -1.26 ∼ -0.08），P = 0.027]；在蒙古族中，优势HGS不对称（β = -0.60，95% CI：-1.35 ∼ 0.15，P = 0.115）和非优势HGS不对称（β = -0.56，95% CI：-1.42 ∼ 0.31，P = 0.206）均与较低的认知评分相关，尽管未发现统计学意义。非优势HGS不对称和较低的HGS，但不是优势HGS不对称，均与延迟回忆（OR = 1.35，95% CI：1.05 ∼ 1.74；OR = 1.10，95% CI：1.01 ∼ 1.21）和流畅性（OR = 1.43，95% CI：1.15 ∼ 1.78；OR = 1.10，95% CI：1.02 ∼ 1.19）受损独立相关。优势HGS不对称（OR = 1.34，95% CI：1.07 ∼ 1.67）和较低的HGS（OR = 1.21，95% CI：1.10 ∼ 1.32）均与视觉感知受损相关。
HGS和HGS不对称均与较低的整体认知表现独立相关。HGS不对称与认知功能之间的关联在不同种族群体中有所不同。
Zotero 插件