Gripwise Versus Jamar: The Challenge of a New Dynamometer Assessing Handgrip Strength.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia diagnosis is partly based on handgrip strength (HGS) assessment. The gold-standard dynamometer for this measurement is the Jamar. The electronic Gripwise is a smaller and lighter one, and its measurements are correlated with the Jamar's in laboratory tests. Our study aimed to confirm this correlation in aged patients. METHODS: This monocenter cross-sectional study was performed in patients of 65 years and older admitted at the University Hospital. Participants were assessed either in a seated or bedridden position, randomly allocated to begin the measurements with the Jamar or the Gripwise. RESULTS: Among 649 aged inpatients assessed for eligibility, 348 were included (mean age: 79 ±â€…9; 52% females). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-0.94, p < .001) for the maximum value measured with both devices and 0.94 (95% CI 0.93-0.95, p < .001) for the mean values. However, there was a significant difference in detecting low values (<16 kg in women, <27 kg in men), found in 48% of patients with Jamar, and 71% with Gripwise (p < .001). Thus, we determined alternate cutoffs for diagnosing HGS low values with the Gripwise (<12 kg in women, <22 kg in men), further validated in a supplementary validation population (n = 70). The diagnostic performances of these alternative cutoffs were high (93% sensitivity and 87% specificity in women; 94% sensitivity and 96% specificity in men). CONCLUSIONS: The correlation of the Gripwise with the Jamar was confirmed in aged inpatients. However, lower values recorded with the Gripwise require alternate cutoffs for a relevant low HGS diagnosis.

A prospective observational cohort study to screen major depressive disorders in geriatric oncology-Comparison of different scales.

OBJECTIVE: Systematic depression screening is recommended for older patients with cancer. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of three mood disorder screening scales frequently used in geriatric oncology to help in diagnosing major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: A prospective multicentre study was conducted in patients 70 years of age and over with cancer, comparing three self-report questionnaires: the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Depression (HADS-D) and the Distress Thermometer (DT). In the event of abnormal scores, a psychologist consultation was suggested and a reassessment of the patient's mood was planned within 3 weeks. Potential differences between initial abnormal screening score and confirmed MDD (according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria [DSM-5]) were assessed using variance analysis for each screening scale. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients with a median age of 81 years (70-95) were included. Sixty-six patients had at least one abnormal score on one of the screening scales. MDD was confirmed in 10 of the 36 reassessed patients. Analysis of ROC curves showed that the HADS-D significantly predicted MDD (AUC = 0.760, IC95% : 0.603-0.917; p = 0.017), but not the GDS-15 or the initial DT. CONCLUSION: The HADS-D could better detect MDD, to confirm in a larger sample.