ABSTRACT
IMPORTANCE: Handgrip dynamometry is probably the most commonly used method to characterize overall human muscle strength. OBJECTIVE: To compare and summarize grip strength measurements obtained from two population-based studies. DESIGN: Secondary data analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from (1) the 2011-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) with 13,918 participants and (2) the 2011 normative phase of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Toolbox project with 3,594 participants. OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The NHANES values used were the mean and best of three trials; the NIH Toolbox value used was the one maximum trial after a practice trial. RESULTS: General linear model analysis revealed that values obtained from the NIH Toolbox differed from NHANES best values but not from NHANES mean values. The analysis also indicated, regardless of the values used, that grip strength differed significantly between dominant and nondominant sides, males and females, and age groups. We provide updated reference values for handgrip strength. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: On the basis of these analyses, we summarize grip strength measures obtained from the NHANES and NIH Toolbox for side, gender, and age group strata. Reference values are essential to assist in the interpretation of testing results and clinical decision making.
Subject(s)
Hand Strength , Muscle Strength/physiology , Nutrition Surveys , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Reference Values , United States , Young AdultABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. INTRODUCTION: The WorkAbility Rate of Manipulation Test (WRMT), an adaptation of the Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test (MMDT), contains a revised board and protocols to improve its utility for therapy or fitness assessment. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To describe the development and preliminary psychometric properties of WRMT. METHODS: Sixty-six healthy participants completed MMDT and WRMT in a random order followed by a user experience survey. We compared tests using repeated-measures analysis of variance, test-retest reliability, and examined agreement between tests. RESULTS: Despite the similarities of these 2 instruments, the different administration protocols resulted in statistically different score distributions (P < .001). Results supported good test-retest reliability of WRMT (placing test ICC = 0.88-0.90 and turning test ICC = 0.68-0.82). The WRMT correlated moderately with MMDT (r = 0.81 in placing test and r = 0.44-0.57 in turning test). Bland-Altman plot showed that the differences in completion time were 3.8 seconds between placing tests and 19.6 (both hands), 0.3 (right hand), and 3.9 (left hand) seconds between turning tests. Overall, participants felt that the instruction of WRMT was easier to follow (44%) and preferred its setup, color, and depth of the test board (49%). Time required to complete 1 panel of 20 disks correlated highly with the time needed to finish a complete trial of 60 disks in both MMDT (r = 0.91-0.97) and WRMT (r = 0.88-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Caution is warranted in comparing scores from these 2 test variants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b.
Subject(s)
Functional Laterality/physiology , Hand/physiology , Motor Skills/physiology , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results , Task Performance and Analysis , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: We sought to define an occupational therapy intervention to promote medication management and to evaluate the acceptability and effectiveness of the intervention. METHOD: Nineteen adults with chronic health conditions and poor medication adherence participated in a two-group, blinded, randomized study. They received either an occupational therapy or a standard care intervention. We used a qualitative method to measure participants' changes in medication management through an interview regarding participants' perceptions and behaviors. RESULTS: The occupational therapy intervention group reported greater improvements in medication management and implemented twice as many new adaptive strategies as the standard care group. Participants indicated that interventions related to advocacy, education, assistive technology, environmental modifications, self-monitoring, and good rapport were the active ingredients of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Occupational therapy is an acceptable intervention for medication management, and it can lead to self-perceived improvements and the adoption of new medication management behaviors. Further research is warranted.
