6533b833fe1ef96bd129c7ea

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Handgrip strength and its prognostic value for mortality in Moscow, Denmark, and England.

Anna OksuzyanPanayotes DemakakosMaria ShkolnikovaMikael ThinggaardJames W. VaupelKaare ChristensenVladimir M. Shkolnikov

subject

MaleAgingAsiaDeath RatesPhysiologyHealth StatusDenmark610lcsh:MedicineResearch and Analysis MethodsMoscowRussiaGeographical LocationsRisk FactorsMedicine and Health SciencesJournal ArticleEthnicitiesHumansBiomechanicsLongitudinal StudiesProspective StudiesMortalitylcsh:ScienceDemographyAgedProportional Hazards ModelsAged 80 and overHand StrengthDeath ratesLongitudinal studieslcsh:RBiology and Life SciencesMiddle AgedPrognosisDanesUnited KingdomEuropeSocial ClassEnglandResearch DesignPeople and PlacesPopulation GroupingsFemaleHand strengthlcsh:QPhysiological ProcessesOrganism DevelopmentResearch ArticleDevelopmental Biology

description

BACKGROUND: This study compares handgrip strength and its association with mortality across studies conducted in Moscow, Denmark, and England.MATERIALS: The data collected by the Study of Stress, Aging, and Health in Russia, the Study of Middle-Aged Danish Twins and the Longitudinal Study of Aging Danish Twins, and the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing was utilized.RESULTS: Among the male participants, the age-standardized grip strength was 2 kg and 1 kg lower in Russia than in Denmark and in England, respectively. The age-standardized grip strength among the female participants was 1.9 kg and 1.6 kg lower in Russia than in Denmark and in England, respectively. In Moscow, a one-kilogram increase in grip strength was associated with a 4% (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94, 0.99) reduction in mortality among men and a 10% (HR = 0.90, 95%CI: 0.86, 0.94) among women. Meanwhile, a one-kilogram increase in grip strength was associated with a 6% (HR = 0.94, 95%CI: 0.93, 0.95) and an 8% (HR = 0.92, 95%CI: 0.90, 0.94) decrease in mortality among Danish men and women, respectively, and with a 2% (HR = 0.98, 95%CI: 0.97, 0.99) and a 3% (HR = 0.97, 95%CI: 0.95, 0.98) reduction in mortality among the English men and women, respectively.CONCLUSION: The study suggests that, although absolute grip strength values appear to vary across the Muscovite, Danish, and English samples, the degree to which grip strength is predictive of mortality is comparable across national populations with diverse socioeconomic and health profiles and life expectancy levels. BACKGROUND: This study compares handgrip strength and its association with mortality across studies conducted in Moscow, Denmark, and England.MATERIALS: The data collected by the Study of Stress, Aging, and Health in Russia, the Study of Middle-Aged Danish Twins and the Longitudinal Study of Aging Danish Twins, and the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing was utilized.RESULTS: Among the male participants, the age-standardized grip strength was 2 kg and 1 kg lower in Russia than in Denmark and in England, respectively. The age-standardized grip strength among the female participants was 1.9 kg and 1.6 kg lower in Russia than in Denmark and in England, respectively. In Moscow, a one-kilogram increase in grip strength was associated with a 4% (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94, 0.99) reduction in mortality among men and a 10% (HR = 0.90, 95%CI: 0.86, 0.94) among women. Meanwhile, a one-kilogram increase in grip strength was associated with a 6% (HR = 0.94, 95%CI: 0.93, 0.95) and an 8% (HR = 0.92, 95%CI: 0.90, 0.94) decrease in mortality among Danish men and women, respectively, and with a 2% (HR = 0.98, 95%CI: 0.97, 0.99) and a 3% (HR = 0.97, 95%CI: 0.95, 0.98) reduction in mortality among the English men and women, respectively.CONCLUSION: The study suggests that, although absolute grip strength values appear to vary across the Muscovite, Danish, and English samples, the degree to which grip strength is predictive of mortality is comparable across national populations with diverse socioeconomic and health profiles and life expectancy levels.

10.1371/journal.pone.0182684http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5580990?pdf=render