HAND GRIP STRENGTH (HGS) OR CHAIR STAND TEST (CST): WHICH IS BETTER FOR IDENTIFYING THE RISK OF ADVERSE OUTCOMES IN OLDER PEOPLE?

• Grant number: 25/01924-9
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate
• Start date: July 01, 2025
• End date: July 31, 2028
• Field of knowledge: Health Sciences - Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy
• Principal Investigator: Tiago da Silva Alexandre
• Grantee: Thales Batista de Souza
• Host Institution: Centro de Ciências Biológicas e da Saúde (CCBS). Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCAR). São Carlos , SP, Brazil

Abstract

As we age, there is a decline in neuromuscular strength that, depending on the intensity, can affect mobility, and functional capacity and increase the risk of death in older adults. Low handgrip strength and poor performance on the sit-to-stand test have been used, in isolation, in an attempt to predict such adverse outcomes. However, there is no consensus on which of these two tests would be more effective in identifying the risk of a decline in walking speed, functional decline in basic and instrumental activities of daily living and death in older adults. Thus, the objective of this project is to compare low handgrip strength and poor performance on the sit-to-stand test and determine which of these two measures best identifies four adverse outcomes in older adults: 1) the risk of decline in walking speed; 2) the risk of difficulty in performing basic activities of daily living; 3) the risk of difficulty in performing instrumental activities of daily living; and 4) the risk of death. Four longitudinal studies with eight years of follow-up will be conducted using data from the English Longitudinal Study of Aging (ELSA). The exposures of interest will be low handgrip strength, defined by the main cutoff points in the literature (<36, <32, <30, <27 and <26 kg for men and <23, <21, <20 and <16 kg for women) and low performance in the sit-to-stand test (>15 seconds). To achieve objectives one, two, and three, generalized linear mixed models controlled for socioeconomic, behavioral and clinical factors will be used. To achieve objective four, Cox regression models also controlled for socioeconomic, behavioral and clinical factors will be used. The present proposal hypothesizes that low performance in the sit-to-stand test is better than low handgrip strength to identify the risk of decline in walking speed, difficulty in performing basic and instrumental activities of daily living and death in the elderly. If this is confirmed, it will be of great value for screening older adults at risk of adverse outcomes in primary care, since the sit-to-stand test is easier, faster, equipment-independent, and less expensive than the handgrip strength test. (AU)