IntroductionEpidemiological studies have shown that weaker grip strength in later life is associated with disability, morbidity, and mortality. Grip strength is a key component of the sarcopenia and frailty phenotypes and yet it is unclear how individual measurements should be interpreted. Our objective was to produce cross-sectional centile values for grip strength across the life course. A secondary objective was to examine the impact of different aspects of measurement protocol.MethodsWe combined 60,803 observations from 49,964 participants (26,687 female) of 12 general population studies in Great Britain. We produced centile curves for ages 4 to 90 and investigated the prevalence of weak grip, defined as strength at least 2.5 SDs below the gender-specific peak mean. We carried out a series of sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of dynamometer type and measurement position (seated or standing).ResultsOur results suggested three overall periods: an increase to peak in early adult life, maintenance through to midlife, and decline from midlife onwards. Males were on average stronger than females from adolescence onwards: males’ peak median grip was 51 kg between ages 29 and 39, compared to 31 kg in females between ages 26 and 42. Weak grip strength, defined as strength at least 2.5 SDs below the gender-specific peak mean, increased sharply with age, reaching a prevalence of 23% in males and 27% in females by age 80. Sensitivity analyses suggested our findings were robust to differences in dynamometer type and measurement position.ConclusionThis is the first study to provide normative data for grip strength across the life course. These centile values have the potential to inform the clinical assessment of grip strength which is recognised as an important part of the identification of people with sarcopenia and frailty.

Background: weak grip strength is a key component of sarcopenia and is associated with subsequent disability and mortality. We have recently established life course normative data for grip strength in Great Britain, but it is unclear whether the cut points we derived for weak grip strength are suitable for use in other settings. Our objective was to investigate differences in grip strength by world region using our data as a reference standard.Methods: we searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for reporting age- and gender-stratified normative data for grip strength. We extracted each item of normative data and converted it on to a Z-score scale relative to our British centiles. We performed meta-regression to pool the Z-scores and compare them by world region.Findings: our search returned 806 abstracts. Sixty papers met inclusion criteria and reported on 63 different samples. Seven UN regions were represented, although most samples (n = 44) were based in developed regions. We extracted 726 normative data items relating to 96,537 grip strength observations. Normative data from developed regions were broadly similar to our British centiles, with a pooled Z-score 0.12 SDs (95% CI: 0.07, 0.17) above the corresponding British centiles. By comparison, normative data from developing regions were clearly lower, with a pooled Z-score of −0.85 SDs (95% CI: −0.94, −0.76).Interpretation: our findings support the use of our British grip strength centiles and their associated cut points in consensus definitions for sarcopenia and frailty across developed regions, but highlight the need for different cut points in developing regions.

IntroductionRecognition that an older person has sarcopenia is important because this condition is linked to a range of adverse outcomes. Sarcopenia becomes increasingly common with age, and yet there are few data concerning its descriptive epidemiology in the very old (aged 85 years and above). Our aims were to describe risk factors for sarcopenia and estimate its prevalence and incidence in a British sample of the very old.MethodsWe used data from two waves (2006/07 and 2009/10) of the Newcastle 85+ Study, a cohort born in 1921 and registered with a Newcastle/North Tyneside general practice. We assessed sarcopenia status using the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) definition. Grip strength was measured using a Takei digital dynamometer (Takei Scientific Instruments Ltd., Niigata, Japan), gait speed was calculated from the Timed Up and Go test, and lean mass was estimated using a Tanita‐305 body fat analyzer. We used logistic regression to examine associations between risk factors for prevalent sarcopenia at baseline and incident sarcopenia at follow‐up.ResultsEuropean Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People sarcopenia was present in 21% of participants at baseline [149/719 participants, mean age 85.5 (0.4) years]. Many participants had either slow gait speed or weak grip strength (74.3%), and hence measurement of muscle mass was frequently indicated by the EWGSOP definition. Incidence data were available for 302 participants, and the incident rate was 3.7 cases per 100 person years at risk. Low Standardized Mini‐Mental State Examination, lower occupational social class, and shorter duration of education were associated with sarcopenia at baseline, while low muscle mass was associated with incident sarcopenia. Low body mass index (BMI) was a risk factor for both in a graded fashion, with each unit decrease associated with increased odds of prevalent [odds ratio (OR) 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.21, 1.37] and incident (OR 1.20, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.33) sarcopenia.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study to describe prevalence and incidence of EWGSOP sarcopenia in the very old. Low BMI was a risk factor for both current and future sarcopenia; indeed, there was some evidence that low BMI may be a reasonable proxy for low lean mass. Overall, the high prevalence of sarcopenia among the very old suggests that this group should be a focus for future research.

This review has found consistent evidence of a positive association between birth weight and muscle strength which is maintained across the lifecourse. Future work will be needed to elucidate the biological mechanisms underlying this association, but it suggests the potential benefit of an early intervention to help people maintain muscle strength in later life.

The aim of this review is to describe the epidemiology of sarcopenia, specifically prevalence, health outcomes and factors across the life course that have been linked to its development. Sarcopenia definitions involve a range of measures (muscle mass, strength and physical performance) which tend to decline with age and hence sarcopenia becomes increasingly prevalent with age. Less is known about prevalence in older people in hospital and care homes, although it is likely to be higher than in community settings. The range of measures used, as well as the cutpoints suggested for each, presents a challenge for comparing prevalence estimates between studies. The importance of sarcopenia is highlighted by the range of adverse health outcomes that strength and physical performance (and to a lesser extent, muscle mass) have been linked to. This is shown most strikingly by the finding of increased all-cause mortality rates among those with weaker grip strength and slower gait speed. A life course approach broadens the window for our understanding of the aetiology of sarcopenia and hence the potential intervention. An example is physical activity, with increased levels across mid-adulthood appearing to increase muscle mass and strength in early old age. Epidemiological studies will continue to make an important contribution to our understanding of sarcopenia and possible avenues for intervention and prevention.

Background Sarcopenia, the loss of muscle strength and mass, predicts adverse outcomes and becomes common with age. There is recognition that sarcopenia may occur at younger ages in those with long‐term conditions (LTCs) as well as those with multimorbidity (the presence of two or more LTCs), but their relationships have been little explored. Our aims were to describe the prevalence of sarcopenia in UK Biobank, a large sample of men and women aged 40–70 years, and to explore relationships with different categories of LTCs and multimorbidity. Methods We used data from 499 046 participants in the baseline of UK Biobank. Our main outcome was probable sarcopenia based on maximum grip strength below sex‐specific cut‐points. Participants' LTCs were recorded during an interview and categorized against a hierarchy. We used logistic regression to examine the independent associations between each category of LTCs and probable sarcopenia, including adjustment for age, sex, and body mass index. We also examined the association with multimorbidity. Results Probable sarcopenia had an overall prevalence of 5.3% and increased with age. The categories with the strongest associations with probable sarcopenia were musculoskeletal/trauma [OR 2.17 (95% CI: 2.11, 2.23)], endocrine/diabetes [OR 1.49 (95% CI: 1.45, 1.55)], and neurological/psychiatric [OR 1.39 (95% CI: 1.34, 1.43)] LTCs. Almost half of the sample (44.5%) had multimorbidity, and they were at nearly twice the odds of probable sarcopenia [OR 1.96 (95% CI: 1.91, 2.02)] compared with those without. Conclusions We have shown an overall prevalence of 5.3% of probable sarcopenia at ages 40–70 in UK Biobank. The risk of probable sarcopenia was higher in those with some categories of LTCs, suggesting that these groups may stand to benefit from assessment of sarcopenia, during mid‐life as well as old age.

Introduction: observational studies do not always find positive associations between physical activity and muscle strength despite intervention studies consistently showing that exercise improves strength in older adults. In previous analyses of the MRC National Survey of Health and Development (NSHD), the 1946 British birth cohort, there was no evidence of an association between leisure time physical activity (LTPA) across adulthood and grip strength at age 53. This study tested the hypothesis that cumulative benefits of LTPA across mid-life on grip strength will have emerged by age 60–64.Methods: data from the MRC NSHD were used to investigate the associations between LTPA at ages 36, 43, 53 and 60–64 and grip strength at 60–64. Linear regression models were constructed to examine the effect of activity at each age separately and as a cumulative score, including adjustment for potential confounders and testing of life course hypotheses.Results: there were complete longitudinal data available for 1,645 participants. There was evidence of a cumulative effect of LTPA across mid-life on grip strength at 60–64. Compared with the third of participants who reported the least LTPA participation across the four time points, those in the top third had on average 2.11 kg (95% CI: 0.88, 3.35) stronger grip after adjustments.Conclusions: increased levels of LTPA across mid-life were associated with stronger grip at age 60–64, in both men and women. As these associations have emerged since age 53, it suggests that LTPA across adulthood may prevent decline in grip strength in early old age.

Background Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) involves the multidimensional assessment and management of an older person. It is well described in hospital and home-based settings. A novel approach could be to perform CGA within primary healthcare, the initial community located healthcare setting for patients, improving accessibility to a co-located multidisciplinary team. Aim To appraise the evidence on CGA implemented within the primary care practice. Methods The review followed PRISMA recommendations. Eligible studies reported CGA on persons aged ≥ 65 in a primary care practice. Studies focusing on a single condition were excluded. Searches were run in five databases; reference lists and publications were screened. Two researchers independently screened for eligibility and assessed study quality. All study outcomes were reviewed. Results The authors screened 9003 titles, 145 abstracts and 97 full texts. Four studies were included. Limited study bias was observed. Studies were heterogeneous in design and reported outcomes. CGAs were led by a geriatrician (n = 3) or nurse practitioner (n = 1), with varied length and extent of follow-up (12-48 months). Post-intervention hospital admission rates showed mixed results, with improved adherence to medication modifications. No improvement in survival or functional outcomes was observed. Interventions were widely accepted and potentially cost-effective. Discussion The four studies demonstrated that CGA was acceptable and provided variable outcome benefit. Further research is needed to identify the most effective strategy for implementing CGA in primary care. Particular questions include identification of patients suitable for CGA within primary care CGA, a consensus list of outcome measures, and the role of different healthcare professionals in delivering CGA.