Skip to main content

Table 2 Details and HGS protocols of the studies that diagnose frailty, included in this systematic review

From: Differences in handgrip strength protocols to identify sarcopenia and frailty - a systematic review

Study details Author Sample Size Age Dynamometer Repetitions Hand Posture Shoulder position Elbow position Wrist position Handle position Encouragement Acquisition time Rest time HGS analysis Cut-off values
Multicentric prospective cohort study
Burgos, Albacete and Madrid, Spain
Abizanda et al. [92] (c) Institutionalised older adults, in four nursing homes from the ACTIVNES study 91 ≥70 Jamar hand dynamometer, Sammons Preston Rolyan, Bolingbrook, IL 3 Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90°
Forearm neutral
Neutral 2nd Higher value Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Alexandria, Egypt
Abou-Raya et al. [93] Consecutive patients with congestive heart failure 126 ≥65 Jamar hand dynamometer 2 Dominant Sitting position Adducted 90° Between 0 and 30° dorsiflexion and 0 and 15° ulnar deviation 2nd Yes M: ≤21 kgf
W: ≤14 kgf
Cross-sectional study
USA
Bandeen-Roche et al. [94] Older adults from the 2011 baseline of the National Health and Aging Trends Study 7439 ≥65 Jamar digital hand dynamometer 2 Dominant Sitting position Adducted 90° Dynamometer or forearm resting on the table 2nd Yes Higher value Lowest 20% within 8 sex and BMI categories
Cross-sectional study
The Netherlands
Bastiaanse et al. [56] (a) Adults with intellectual disabilities from the HA-ID study 884 ≥50 Jamar hand dynamometer, Sammons Preston Rolyan, USA 6 Both Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90°
Forearm neutral
Neutral 2nd 1 min Higher value Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Liège, Belgium
Beaudart et al. [58] (d) Community-dwelling older adults from the SarcoPhAge study 534 ≥65 Hydraulic dynamometer Saehan Corporation, MSD Europe, Bvba, Belgium
(calibrated)
6 Both Sitting position Forearms resting on the arms of the chair Neutral position, over the end of the arm of the chair, thumb facing upwards Adjusted so that the thumb is round one side of the handle and the four fingers are around the other side Yes Higher value Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
England
Buttery et al. [95] Consecutively patients from three elderly care wards of an urban teaching hospital 44 67–91 Jamar isometric hand dynamometer, Sammons Preston, Bolingbrook, Illinois, USA 6 Both Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90° Between 0 and 30° dorsiflexion and 0 and 15° ulnar deviation 2nd Yes Higher value Compared with normative data from Bohannon et al. [96]
Cross-sectional study
Germany
Buttery et al. [97] Community-dwelling older adults from the DEGS1 1843 65–79 Smedley hand dynamometer, Scandidact, Denmark, 100 kg 4 Both Standing upright Higher value Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Urban administrative section of Taipei, Taiwan
Chang et al. [98] Community-dwelling older adults 234 ≥65 Handgrip dynamometer, Fabrication Enterprises, Inc., Irvington, NY Both Adducted 90° Yes Lowest 20% at baseline
Cross-sectional study
Saint Bruno,Québec, Canada and Santa Cruz, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil
Da Camara et al. [99] Community-dwelling older adults 124 65–74 Jamar hand dynamometer, Jamar, Irvington, NY, USA 3 Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90°
Forearm neutral
Neutral Adjusted to a comfortable position between the 2nd or 3th handle 1 min Mean value Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Chicago, USA
Danilovich et al. [100] (b) Convenience sample of older adults 42 ≥65 Jamar hand hydraulic dynamometer 4 Both Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90° Between 0 and 30° dorsiflexion 2nd Higher value M: <30 kgf
W: <20 kgf
Cross-sectional study
Denmark
Dato et al. [101] Community-dwelling older adults 3719 ≥70 Smedley hand dynamometer TTM 3 Dominant Sitting position Adducted Higher value **
Cross-sectional study
The Netherlands
Evenhuis et al. [102] Individuals with borderline to profound intellectual disabilities of three care provider services from the HA-ID Study 848 ≥50 Jamar hand dynamometer, 5030 J1, Sammons Preston Rolyan, Dolgeville, NY 6 Both Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90° Between 0 and 30° dorsiflexion and 0 and 15° ulnar deviation 2nd Yes Fried’s criteria*
Prospective cohort study
USA
Fried et al. [10] Community-dwelling older adults from the Cardiovascular Health study 5317 ≥65 Jamar hand dynamometer 3 Dominant Sitting position 90° 2nd Yes Mean value Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
The Kolpino district, St. Petersburg, Russia
Gurina et al. [103] Community-dwelling older adults from the “Crystal” Study 611 ≥65 Carpal dynamometer (DK-50, Nizhni Tagil, Russian Federation) 6 Both Standing upright Arms hanging down at the sides 30 s Mean value Lowest 20%, adjusted for sex and BMI
Cross-sectional study
Vienna, Austria.
Haider et al. [104] (d) Pre-frail and frail community-dwelling older adults 83 ≥65 Jamar hydraulic hand
dynamometer, Lafayette, Louisiana
6 Both Sitting position Forearms resting on the arms of the chair Neutral, over the end of the arm of the chair, thumb facing upwards Adjusted so that the thumb is round one side of the handle and the four fingers are around the other side Yes 1 min Higher value **
Cross-sectional and prospective cohort study
The Netherlands
Hoogendijk et al. [105] Older adults from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam 1115 ≥65 Takei TKK 5001, Takei Scientific Instruments, Tokyo, Japan 4 Both Standing upright or sitting position when the participant was not able to stand 180° Sum of the highest values of each hand Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Seoul, Korea
Kang et al. [106] Female outpatients from the department of family medicine at Kangbuk Samsung Hospital 121 ≥65 Lavisen electronic hand grip dynamometer KS 301, Lavisen Co.
Ltd., Namyangju, Korea
Right Abducted 180° Medial phalange of the third finger perpendicular to the handle ≤14.5 kgf
Cross-sectional study
Seoul and Gyeonggi province, Korea
Kim et al. [107] Older adults who registered at six senior welfare centers 486 ≥65 Jamar hydraulic hand dynamometer; Sammons Preston, Bolingbrook, IL, USA 2 Abducted 180° Higher value Lowest 20%, adjusted for sex and BMI
Cross-sectional study
Beaver Dam, Wisconsin
Klein et al. [108] Adults and older adults from the Beaver Dam Eye Study 2962 ≥53 Lafayette hand dynamometer, Model 78,010, Lafayette Instrument Company, Lafayette, Indiana 4 Both Standing upright Abducted 180° Adjusted to hand size Mean value for the dominant hand M: ≤ 34.5 kgf
W: ≤ 18.5 kgf
Randomised controlled trial
Itabashi Ward, Tokyo, Japan
Kwon et al. [109] Pre-frail community-dwelling older women 89 ≥70 Smedley hand dynamometer, Yagami, Tokyo, Japan 2 Dominant Standing upright Arms hanging naturally at their sides Higher value W: ≤23 kgf at baseline
Cohort study
Korea
Lee et al. [110] Community-dwelling older adults from the Living profiles of Older People Survey 11,844 ≥65 Tanita, No. 6103, Japan 4 Both Elbow by the side of the body 90° Higher value Lowest 20%, adjusted for sex and BMI
Prospective cohort study
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Mohr et al. [111] Community-dwelling men from the Massachusetts Male Aging study 646 50–86 Jamar hydraulic hand dynamometer, Sammons Preston, Bolingbrook, IL 2 Dominant Sitting position Arms at their sides 90°
Forearm neutral
Neutral Adjusted to hand size 3 s 1 min Higher value M: ≤28 kgf (BMI ≤ 24.9 kg/m2);
≤30 kgf (BMI 25.0–27.2 kg/m2); ≤32 kgf
(BMI > 27.2 kg/m2)
Prospective cohort study
Barcelona, Spain
Mora et al. [112] Community-dwelling women from the Mataró Ageing Study 110 ≥70 Jamar hand dynamometer 3 Non-dominant Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90°
Forearm neutral
Between 0 and 30° dorsiflexion and between 0 and 15° ulnar deviation Yes Mean value Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Moreira et al. [113] (b) Community-dwelling older women with type 2 diabetes 99 65–89 Jamar hand dynamometer 3 Dominant Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90°
Forearm neutral
Between 0 and 30° dorsiflexion 2nd Yes Mean value Fried’s criteria*
Double-blind, randomised, controlled trial
Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Muller et al. [114] Community-dwelling older men 100 ≥70 Jamar hand dynamometer, Horsham, PA 3 Non-dominant Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90°
Forearm neutral
Between 0 and 30° dorsiflexion and between 0 and 15° ulnar deviation Yes Mean value **
Cross-sectional study
Dimantina, Brasil
Parentoni et al. [115] (c) Convenience sample of older women 106 ≥65 Saehan dynamometer, SH5001
(calibrated)
3 Dominant Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90°
Forearm neutral
Neutral 2nd Yes 1 min Mean value Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Calabria district, Italy
Passarino et al. [116] Community-dwelling older adults 369 65–85 Smedley hand dynamometer TTM 3 Dominant Sitting position Adducted Higher value **
Cohort study
Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona and California, USA
Samper-Ternent et al. [117] Non-institutionalised Mexican Americans from the Hispanic Established Population for the Epidemiological Study of the Elderly 1370 ≥65 Jamar hydraulic hand dynamometer, Model 5030 J1, J.A. Preston Corp., Clifton, NJ 2 Dominant Sitting position Resting on the table Palm facing up Adjusted to a comfortable position Yes Higher value Lowest 20%, adjusted for sex and BMI
Cohort study
United States and Denmark
Sanders et al. [118] Community-dwelling individuals from The Long Life Family Study 4875 32–105 Jamar hydraulic hand Dynamometer, Lafayette, IN 2 Dominant Sitting position Mean value Lowest 25%, adjusted for sex and BMI
Cross-sectional study
Saarland, Germany
Saum et al. [119] (d) Community-dwelling adults from ESTHER study 3112 ≥59 Jamar hand dynamometer, Lafayette Instrument Company, Lafayette, IN 3 Dominant Sitting position Forearm resting on the arm of the chair Neutral, over the end of the arm of the chair, thumb facing upwards Adjusted so that the thumb is round one side of the handle and the four fingers are around the other side Yes Higher value M: <30 kgf
W: <20 kgf
and
Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Lausanne, Switzerland
Seematter-Bagnoud et al. [120] Community-dwelling older adults from the Lc65+ study 861 65–70 Baseline hydraulic dynamometer 3 Right Sitting position Adducted and neutrally rotated 90° Between 0 and 30° dorsiflexion and 0 and 15° ulnar deviation 2nd Yes Higher value Fried’s criteria*
Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial
The Netherlands
Tieland et al. [121] Frail older adults 62 ≥65 Jamar hand dynamometer, Jackson, MI, USA 6 Both Sitting position 90° Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Portugal
Vieira et al. [122] (c) Institutionalised older adults from three urban residential homes 50 68–99 Jamar hydraulic hand dynamometer, J00105 3 Dominant Sitting position Adducted and in extension 90°
Forearm neutral
Extended between 0 and 30° . 10 s 1 min M:<30 kgf
W: <18 kgf
Cross-sectional study
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Walston et al. [123] Community-dwelling women from the Women’s Health and Aging Studies I and II 463 70–79 Jamar hand dynamometer, model BK-74978, Fred Sammons, Inc., Burr Ridge, IL 6 Both Sitting position Adducted 90° . Yes Higher value of the non-dominant hand Fried’s criteria*
Cross-sectional study
Southern Taiwan
Wu et al. [124] Community-dwelling older adults and outpatients from a hospital-based outpatient clinic 90 ≥65 Jamar hand dynamometer, Sammons Preston, Bolingbrook, IL Dominant Sitting position Fried’s criteria*
  1. S Seconds; Min Minutes; M Men; W Women
  2. (a) Study cited the ASHT 1981 protocol
  3. (b) Study cited the ASHT 1992 protocol
  4. (c) Study cited the ASHT protocol, without specifying which protocol year was used
  5. (d) Study cited the Southampton protocol
  6. * Fried’s criteria (Cut-off points for handgrip strength) Men: ≤29 kgf (BMI ≤ 24 kg/m2); ≤30 kgf (BMI 24.1–26 kg/m2); ≤30 kgf (BMI 26.1–28 kg/m2); ≤32 kgf (BMI > 28 kg/m2) / Women: ≤17 kgf (BMI ≤ 23 kg/m2); ≤17.3 kgf (BMI 23.1–26 kg/m2); ≤18 kgf (BMI 26.1–29 kg/m2); ≤21 kgf (BMI > 29 kg/m2)
  7. ** Not defined due to the type of analysis conducted by the study