Relative sit‐to‐stand power: aging trajectories, functionally relevant cut‐off points, and normative data in a large European cohort

Abstract

Background A validated, standardized, and feasible test to assess muscle power in older adults has recently been reported: the sit‐to‐stand (STS) muscle power test. This investigation aimed to assess the relationship between relative STS power and age and to provide normative data, cut‐off points, and minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for STS power measures in older women and men. Methods A total of 9320 older adults (6161 women and 3159 men) aged 60–103 years and 586 young and middle‐aged adults (318 women and 268 men) aged 20–60 years were included in this cross‐sectional study. Relative (normalized to body mass), allometric (normalized to height squared), and specific (normalized to legs muscle mass) muscle power values were assessed by the 30 s STS power test. Body composition was evaluated by dual energy X‐ray absorptiometry and bioelectrical impedance analysis, and legs skeletal muscle index (SMI; normalized to height squared) was calculated. Habitual and maximal gait speed, timed up‐and‐go test, and 6 min walking distance were collected as physical performance measures, and participants were classified into two groups: well‐functioning and mobility‐limited older adults. Results Relative STS power was found to decrease between 30–50 years (−0.05 W·kg−1·year−1; P > 0.05), 50–80 years (−0.10 to −0.13 W·kg−1·year−1; P < 0.001), and above 80 years (−0.07 to −0.08 W·kg−1·year−1; P < 0.001). A total of 1129 older women (18%) and 510 older men (16%) presented mobility limitations. Mobility‐limited older adults were older and exhibited lower relative, allometric, and specific power; higher body mass index (BMI) and legs SMI (both only in women); and lower legs SMI (only in men) than their well‐functioning counterparts (all P < 0.05). Normative data and cut‐off points for relative, allometric, and specific STS power and for BMI and legs SMI were reported. Low relative STS power occurred below 2.1 W·kg−1 in women (area under the curve, AUC, [95% confidence interval, CI] = 0.85 [0.84–0.87]) and below 2.6 W·kg−1 in men (AUC [95% CI] = 0.89 [0.87–0.91]). The age‐adjusted odds ratios [95% CI] for mobility limitations in older women and men with low relative STS power were 10.6 [9.0–12.6] and 14.1 [10.9–18.2], respectively. MCID values for relative STS power were 0.33 W·kg−1 in women and 0.42 W·kg−1 in men. Conclusions Relative STS power decreased significantly after the age of 50 years and was negatively and strongly associated with mobility limitations. Our study provides normative data, functionally relevant cut‐off points, and MCID values for STS power for their use in daily clinical practice.

Individual and Synergistic Relationships of Low Muscle Mass and Low Muscle Function with Depressive Symptoms in Korean Older Adults

“…First, quantification of ASM was based on DXA, which is known as a gold standard for body composition analysis. Second, calculated STS muscle power based on 30 s chair stand test was used as an indicator of MF, which is known as a reliable and valid index for functional capacity and mortality in a recent study involving older adults [ 23 ]. Third, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to examine the individual and synergistic relationships of low ASM and low MF with depressive symptoms in Korean adults.…”

“…Relative muscle power (W·kg −1 ) was calculated as sit and stand mean muscle power (W) normalized to total body mass (kg). The cut-points for low relative MF used in the current study were 2.6 W·kg −1 and 2.16 W·kg −1 for men and women, respectively, which were recently tested and validated in a sample of 9320 older adults aged 60–103 years [ 23 ].…”

Anabolic-Androgenic Steroids and Exercise Training: Breaking the Myths and Dealing With Better Outcome in Sarcopenia

“…Physical function is determined by multifactorial elements, in which the neuromuscular and metabolic systems play a role in some physical capacities, such as strength, power, agility, and balance ( Reid and Fielding, 2012 ; Tieland et al, 2018 ; Valenzuela et al, 2019 ). In addition, other factors, such as lifestyle, psychosocial, and body composition (muscle mass and body fat) may also be variables that may impair physical function ( Tieland et al, 2018 ; Alcazar et al, 2021a ). It is well established that exercise promotes changes in the determinants of physical function, hence promoting several benefits to an individual’s overall health ( Valenzuela et al, 2019 ; García-Hermoso et al, 2020 ; Letnes et al, 2021 ).…”

“…The world population continues to age rapidly due to an increase in human life expectancy and a decrease in the birth rate over the past years ( Kingston et al, 2018 ; Chang et al, 2019 ). This biological process, known as aging, is related to the increase in the incidence of physical disability ( Tieland et al, 2018 ; Suetta et al, 2019 ; Alcazar et al, 2021a ), which contribute to a worse quality of life and greater morbidity and mortality among older adults. The physical function has shown to be negatively associated with mortality than other classical risk factors, such as hypertension, diabetes, smoking, and body mass index ( Wu et al, 2017 ; Yusuf et al, 2020 ; Whelton et al, 2021 ).…”

30 s sit-to-stand power is positively associated with chest muscle thickness in COVID-19 survivors

“…30s-STS power) to help assess global muscle-wasting. 28 , 29 We hypothesize that the functional capacity of the lower limbs is associated with the global muscle wasting expressed by the PMA. The aim of the study was to determine the association between the 30s-STS power and the PMA in COVID-19 survivors.…”