Relation between handgrip strength,upper limb disability and handicap among elderly women

Abstract

Age-related reductions in physical performance are important when thresholds required for independent activity are approached. Much rehabilitation aims to alleviate disability by improving physical performance (e.g. range of movement or strength), but information about the relation between impairments and disabilities and about the levels of relevant thresholds is very limited. This study aimed to examine the relation between impairment of handgrip strength, dexterity disability and handicap. Eighteen female day centre clients (mean age 78.9, SD 9.9 years) were assessed using the following measurements: a handgrip dynamometer, a standarized task of moving a saucepan of different weights, the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys' scale of severity of dexterity disability and self-perceived health status using the Nottingham Health Profile. Strong correlations were observed between impairment of handgrip force and dexterity (r = —0.7251, P <0.001), but not between impairment/disability and handicap variables. A threshold effect was observed: four out of 18 subjects with a low handgrip strength per total forearm volume (<0.10 N/ml) were unable to perform a saucepan task and had low dexterity ability. The impact of a training regimen directed towards improving the handgrip force of those approaching the threshold required for independent activity should be evaluated.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aniansson A. , Grimby G. , Hedberg M. , Krotkiewski M. Muscle morphology, enzyme activity and muscle strength in elderly men and women. Clin Physiol 1981; 1: 73-86.

Bruce SA , Newton D. , Woledge RC Effect of age on voluntary force and cross-sectional area of human adductor pollicis muscle. Q J Exp Physiol 1989; 74: 359-62.

Danneskiold-Samsoe B. , Kofod V. , Munter J. , Grimby G, Schnohr, Jensen G. Muscle strength and functional capacity in 78-81 year old men and women. Eur J Appl Physiol 1984; 52: 310-14.

Young A. , Stokes M. , Crowe M. Size and strength of the quadriceps muscles of old and young women. Eur J Clin Invest 1984; 14: 282-87.

Young A. , Stokes M. , Crowe M. The size and strength of the quadriceps muscles of old and young men. Clin Physiol 1985; 5: 145-54.

Shepherd RJ Physical activity and aging, second edition. London: Croom Helm, 1987; 105-108.

Vitsah JJ , Era P. , Leskinson AL , Heikkinan E. Muscle strength profiles and anthropometry in random samples of men aged 31-35, and 51-55, and 71-75 years. Ergonomics 1985 ; 28: 1563-74.

Grimby G. , Danneskiold-Samsoe B. , Hvid K. , Saltin B. Morphology and enzymatic capacity in arm and leg muscles in 78-81 year old men and women. Acta Physiol Scand 1982; 115: 125-34.

Timiras PS ed. Physiological basis of aging and geriatrics. London: Macmillan , 1988; 361-63.

10.

Davies CT , Thomas DO , White MJ Mechanical properties of young and elderly human muscle. Acta Med Scand [Suppl] 1986; 711: 219-26.

11.

McDonagh MJ , White MJ , Davies CT Different effects of aging on the mechanical properties of human arm and leg muscles. Gerontology 1984; 30: 49-54.

12.

Campbell MJ , McComas AJ , Petito F. Physiological changes in aging and muscles . J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1973; 36: 174-82.

13.

Smith EL , Gilligan C. Physical activity prescription for the older adult. The Physician and Sports Medicine 1983; 11: 91-101.

14.

Young A. Exercise physiology in geriatric practice. Acta Med Scand [Suppl] 1986; 711: 227-32.

15.

Glagov S. , Rowley DA , Gramer DB , Page RS Heart rates during 24 hours of usual activity for 100 normal men. J Appl Physiol 1970; 29: 799-805.

16.

Sidney KH , Shephard RJ Activity patterns of elderly men and women. J Gerontol 1977; 32: 25-32.

17.

Fentem PH , Bassey EJ , Turnbull NB The new case for exercise. London: Sports Council and Health Education Authority, 1988.

18.

World Health Organization. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1980.

19.

Bassey EJ , Dudley BR , Harries UJ A portable strain gauged dynamometer. Physiol 1986; 373: 6.

20.

Katch V. , Weltman A. Predictability of body segment volumes in living subjects. Hum Biol 1975; 47: 203-18.

21.

Martin J. , Meltzer H. , Elliot D. OPCS surveys of disability in GB report 1. The prevalence of disability among adults. London: HMSO, 1989.

22.

Hunt SM , McEwen J. , McKenna SP Measuring health status. London: Croom Helm, 1986.

23.

Ikai M. , Fukunaga T.

Calculation of muscle strength per unit cross-sectional area of human muscle by means of ultrasonic measurement. Int Z Angew Physiol Einschl Arbeit

Physiol 1968 ; 26: 26-32.

24.

Schantz P. , Randall-Fox E. , Hutchinson W. , Tyden A. , Astrand PO Muscle fibre distribution, muscle cross-sectional area and maximal voluntary strength in humans. Acta Physiol Scand 1983 ; 117: 219-26.

25.

Jones PR , Pearson J. Anthropometric determination of leg fat and muscle plus bone volumes of young male and female adults. J Physiol 1969; 204: 63-66.

26.

Heron A. , Chown S. Age and function. Boston: Little, Brown, 1967.

27.

Badley EM , Wagstaff S. , Wood P. Measures of functional ability (disability) in arthritis in relation to impairment of range of joint movement. Ann Rheum Dis 1984; 43: 563-69.

28.

Tallis R. The Marjory Warren Lecture: Measurement and the future of rehabilitation. Geriatr Med 1989; January: 31-36.

29.

Ebrahim S. Measurement of impairment, disability and handicap. In: Hopkins A ed. Measuring the outcomes of medical care. London: London Royal College of Physicians, 1990.