Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jan 10.
Published in final edited form as: Adv Geriatr Med Res. 2019 Dec 31;2(1):e200005. doi: 10.20900/agmr20200005

Absolute and Body Mass Index Normalized Handgrip Strength Percentiles by Gender, Ethnicity, and Hand Dominance in Americans

Ryan McGrath 1,*, Kyle J Hackney 1, Nicholas A Ratamess 2, Brenda M Vincent 3, Brian C Clark 4,5,6, William J Kraemer 7
PMCID: PMC6954001  NIHMSID: NIHMS1066034  PMID: 31930203

Abstract

Background

Gender and ethnicity are factors which influence strength, and hand dominance could be a critical component of handgrip strength (HGS) testing. Providing such HGS percentiles across the lifespan may help to identify weakness-related health concerns. We sought to generate growth charts and curves for HGS by gender and ethnicity in a nationally-representative sample of Americans aged 6–80 years.

Methods

Data from 13,617 participants in the 2011–2012 and 2013–2014 waves of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were analyzed. HGS was measured with a handgrip dynamometer. Age, gender, ethnicity, and hand dominance were self-reported. Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated from height and body mass. Measures of absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI were separately included in parametric quantile regression analyses for determining the 10th–90th percentiles across ages by gender and ethnicity. Similar models were also conducted by hand dominance.

Results

Differences in absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI quantiles across ages existed for each ethnicity regardless of gender. In men, absolute HGS generally increased until about 25 years of age, began to decline around age 30 years, and regressed into older adulthood. In women, absolute HGS appeared to rise starting at age 6 years, peaked between 20 and 30 years of age, but was maintained into mid-life before declining in older adulthood. Similar results were found for HGS normalized to BMI.

Conclusions

Our findings provide percentile charts for HGS capacity that could be utilized for comparing individual measures of HGS to those from a United States population-representative sample.

Keywords: aging, epidemiology, hand strength, human development, muscle weakness

INTRODUCTION

Muscle strength can be conveniently assessed by measuring maximal handgrip strength (HGS) with a handgrip dynamometer [1]. Those that have lower levels of muscle strength earlier in life often experience poor health outcomes related to weakness later in life [2]. Similarly, health consequences related to low muscle strength, as measured by HGS, occur throughout the lifespan [3]. For example, the presence of pediatric sarcopenia, as characterized by low skeletal muscle mass and function at childhood, places children at higher risk for several adverse health outcomes [4]. Low muscle strength in adolescents is linked to psychiatric diagnoses, suicide, cardiovascular diseases, and all-cause mortality at young adulthood [5]. Leong et al. [6] also found that every 5-kilogram decrease in HGS was associated with 16% greater risk for all-cause mortality at a median 4-year follow-up in 142,861 adults aged 35–70 years. The 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans highlight the importance of participating in muscle-strengthening activities for health at childhood, adolescents, adulthood, and older adulthood [7]. Moreover, strength capacity is a subdomain in the intrinsic capacity construct [8], and handgrip strength is part of decision algorithms for diagnosing sarcopenia [9]. Therefore, muscle strength should be considered a critical health indicator across the lifespan.

Gender and ethnicity are important factors that may influence muscle strength. For example, Silva et al. [10] showed that lifespan skeletal muscle mass was higher in men than women, and non-Hispanic Blacks had the highest skeletal muscle mass, followed by non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanics, and non-Hispanic Asians. These muscle mass differences may help to explain why HGS thresholds for determining weakness have emphasized stratification by gender and ethnicity [11–13]. Additional research is also recommended for developing predictive regression models for HGS that emphasize age, gender, and ethnicity [14]. Similarly, as HGS protocols continue evolving, examining the HGS of the dominant and non-dominant hands may provide important insights into how HGS is measured and data are used, especially because handedness changes throughout the lifespan [2,15]. Given the positive health aspects of muscle strength over the lifespan, along with the role gender and ethnicity have on strength capacity, assessments of strength could be individualized to gender and ethnicity. Creating lifespan muscle strength centiles by gender and ethnicity across ages will help to provide a detailed norm-referenced standard for comparing individual HGS measures to those from an American population-representative sample. Further, normative data for HGS is a high research priority for developing validated cut-points that improve how we diagnose sarcopenia [9]. The purpose of this study was to generate growth charts and curves for HGS by gender and ethnicity in a nationally-representative sample of Americans aged 6–80 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participants

Secondary analyses of data from participants in the 2011–2012 and 2013–2014 waves of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were performed for this investigation. The NHANES is designed to assess the health and nutrition status of American children, adolescents, and adults [16]. Trained interviewers performed health interviews in respondents’ homes using computer-aided interview systems and participants visited mobile examination centers for enhanced assessments. Interviewers and mobile examination centers traveled to locations throughout the United States to diversify sampling [17].

Oversampling for those aged at least 60-years, Hispanics, non-Hispanic Asians, non-Hispanic Blacks occurred to create reliable data that represented all ages and ethnicities in the United States [16]. Overall interview response rates for the NHANES were relatively high for each waved included in our analyses [18]. The NHANES uses an intricate, 4 stage probability sampling design to produce a representative sample of non-institutionalized persons in the United States. Written informed consent was provided by participants and NHANES protocols were approved by the National Center for Health Statistics Research Ethics Review Board (Protocol #2011-17).

Measures

A digital handgrip dynamometer (Takei Dynamometer Model T.K.K.5401; Akiha-Ku, Japan) was used to measure HGS. All personnel that administered HGS tests received training and calibration procedures, and a calibration log. Before testing, participants were asked about their ability to complete HGS protocols, including if they had surgery to the hand or wrist within the previous 3 months that prohibited them from HGS testing, or if they were unable to hold the dynamometer with either hand. Interviewers verbally explained and demonstrated the HGS protocols. Participants were instructed to stand with their feet hip width apart and hold the dynamometer away from their body and in line with the forearm, at thigh level so that the dynamometer did not touch the body (unless physically unable). An emphasis was made on squeezing the handle of the dynamometer hard and quickly [19].

A practice trial at sub-maximal effort was performed by participants to determine if the dynamometer was properly fitted to their hand size and to confirm understanding of the HGS protocol. Each person squeezed the dynamometer with maximal effort, exhaling while squeezing, and then released the muscle contractions. Participants reported their hand dominance and the decision to begin HGS testing on the dominant or non-dominant hand was randomized. Each hand was tested 3 times, alternating hands between trials, with 60 seconds of rest between measures on the same hand. The highest recorded HGS value on either hand was included in the analyses. More details about the HGS protocols are published elsewhere [20,21].

Age, gender, and ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic Asian, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White) were self-reported. A fixed stadiometer was used to collect standing height and a digital scale (Mettler-Toledo International; Columbus, OH) was used to collect body mass. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated as body mass in kilograms divided by height in meters-squared. Given that body composition may impact strength capacity, we included both absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI (HGS normalized to BMI = HGS (kg)/BMI (kg/m2)) in our analyses [14]. A diagram for participant exclusions is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Diagram of Participant Exclusions.

Statistical Analysis

All analyses were conducted with SAS 9.4 software (SAS Institute; Cary, NC, USA). Parametric quantile regression models were run to generate absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI growth charts for the 10th–90th percentiles by gender and ethnicity for Americans aged 6–80 years. The same procedures were also performed for HGS data from the dominant and non-dominant hands. These 10 quantiles were pre-specified by investigators to bolster the interpretability of the results in the free-living environment. Fitted values for absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI were estimated at each ascertained age. Utilizing parametric quantile regression to create growth curves allows the models to fit conditional quantiles of strength capacity without assuming a parametric distribution, estimate the entire conditional distribution of the response, and reveal the effects of predictors on various parts of the response distribution, thereby making quantile regression feasible for analyses of datasets with larger amounts of observations such as NHANES [22].

The PROC QUANTREG procedure was used to determine the gender- and ethnicity-specific growth patterns of absolute HGS and HGS relative to BMI with 6 powers of age (age, age2, age3, age−1, √age, √age × age) [23]. Sample weights were utilized in the PROC QUANTREG procedure to acknowledge the NHANES sampling methods and generate an unbiased national estimate [24]. The PROC SGPLOT procedure created the absolute HGS and HGS relative to BMI growth curves by gender and ethnicity across ages from each quantile regression output [25].

RESULTS

The descriptive characteristics of the 13,617 participants (n = 6723 (49.4%) men (age range: 6–80 years); n = 6894 (50.6%) women (age range: 6–80 years)) included are in Table 1. To make comparisons for the descriptive characteristics by gender and ethnicity, the means and 95% confidence intervals are in Supplementary File 1. Table 2 shows the number of participants by age group for each gender and ethnicity. Figures 2 and 3 show the 10 percentile curves for absolute HGS with polynomials together and scatterplots by ethnicity for men and women, respectively. Differences in absolute HGS quantiles across ages existed for each ethnicity regardless of gender. In men, there were mostly rapid increases in absolute HGS beginning at 7 years of age until about 25 years of age. Declines in absolute HGS appeared to occur at around 30 years of age and accelerated reductions in absolute HGS seemingly started at about 70 years of age. Absolute HGS looked to rise starting at 6 years of age and peaked between 20–30 years of age for women. Non-Hispanic Asian women appeared to uniquely maintain their peak absolute HGS into mid-life (i.e., 40 years of age). Table 3 shows an abbreviated amount of information for absolute HGS quantiles by age group, gender, and ethnicity, while Supplementary File 2 presents specific absolute HGS quantile values for each age, gender, and ethnicity.

Table 1.

Descriptive Characteristics of the Participants.

Variables Age (years) Absolute HGS (kg) BMI (kg/m2) Right Handed (n (%))
Men
 Non-Hispanic Asian (n = 827) 35.1 ± 20.2 37.3 ± 11.9 23.5 ± 4.7 760 (91.9%)
 Non-Hispanic Black (n = 1718) 34.4 ± 22.5 40.6 ± 15.1 26.1 ± 7.6 1494 (86.9%)
 Hispanic (n = 1666) 30.5 ± 21.1 35.8 ± 14.4 25.7 ± 6.6 1544 (92.6%)
 Non-Hispanic White (n = 2512) 40.8 ± 23.2 40.9 ± 13.8 26.7 ± 7.0 2282 (90.8%)
Women
 Non-Hispanic Asian (n = 826) 35.0 ± 20.0 25.1 ± 6.5 22.7 ± 4.9 777 (94.0%)
 Non-Hispanic Black (n = 1800) 34.6 ± 22.1 28.7 ± 8.5 28.6 ± 9.2 1629 (90.5%)
 Hispanic (n = 1737) 31.6 ± 21.4 24.9 ± 7.4 26.6 ± 7.5 1633 (94.0%)
 Non-Hispanic White (n = 2531) 42.6 ± 23.0 27.1 ± 7.2 27.4 ± 8.0 2320 (91.6%)
Open in a new tab

Note: Results are presented as mean ± standard deviation or frequency (percentage) where indicated. BMI = body mass index; HGS = handgrip strength; kg = kilograms; kg/m2 = kilograms per meters-squared.

Table 2.

Frequencies of Participants by Age Group for Each Gender and Ethnicity.

Variables 6–9 Years 10–19 Years 20–29 Years 30–39 Years 40–49 Years 50–59 Years 60–69 Years 70–79 Years 80+ Years
Men
 Non-Hispanic Asian 82 167 120 118 118 99 78 33 12
 Non-Hispanic Black 223 433 209 161 160 187 223 91 31
 Hispanic 266 491 184 160 166 152 176 52 19
 Non-Hispanic White 232 408 301 338 299 294 239 217 184
Women
 Non-Hispanic Asian 79 176 110 128 118 96 73 36 10
 Non-Hispanic Black 226 438 214 159 204 220 213 91 35
 Hispanic 247 510 186 182 182 152 183 73 22
 Non-Hispanic White 174 378 287 342 317 309 280 257 187
Open in a new tab

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Absolute Handgrip Strength Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Men by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Absolute Handgrip Strength Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Women by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Table 3.

Abbreviated Absolute Handgrip Strength Percentiles by Gender and Ethnicity.

Variables Percentile (kilograms)
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Males
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 14.1 16.2 17.2 18.2 19.4 21.0 22.0 22.8 25.2
  20 Years Old 32.6 35.4 37.4 39.6 41.7 43.3 44.9 47.2 51.0
  30 Years Old 36.2 38.5 41.4 43.1 45.5 47.0 49.4 51.6 54.2
  40 Years Old 36.4 39.2 41.5 43.1 44.7 46.1 48.5 50.8 53.4
  50 Years Old 35.5 38.3 40.0 41.8 42.9 44.5 46.5 48.7 51.3
  60 Years Old 32.8 35.0 36.8 38.7 40.2 42.1 43.5 45.5 47.4
  70 Years Old 28.1 29.7 32.1 33.6 35.4 37.4 38.7 40.6 42.8
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 15.9 18.1 19.9 21.1 22.3 23.6 24.6 26.2 27.9
  20 Years Old 36.8 40.8 43.7 46.7 49.6 51.6 53.4 56.5 59.6
  30 Years Old 42.3 46.4 49.4 51.9 54.2 56.8 59.1 62.3 66.0
  40 Years Old 42.8 45.6 48.3 50.2 52.3 54.6 57.0 59.4 63.5
  50 Years Old 40.3 42.9 45.4 47.1 49.4 51.3 53.7 55.9 60.0
  60 Years Old 35.1 39.3 41.9 43.6 46.0 48.0 50.7 53.2 57.0
  70 Years Old 27.9 34.4 37.2 39.1 41.2 43.8 46.4 49.2 52.7
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 15.0 16.6 17.7 18.8 19.9 20.9 22.2 23.7 25.9
  20 Years Old 34.5 38.4 40.9 42.9 45.6 48.2 50.7 53.8 56.9
  30 Years Old 39.5 43.2 45.7 47.0 49.5 51.9 53.8 57.0 60.6
  40 Years Old 38.7 41.6 43.8 45.2 46.9 48.8 50.6 53.4 57.2
  50 Years Old 35.5 38.2 40.4 42.4 43.7 45.5 47.7 50.1 53.8
  60 Years Old 31.1 34.5 36.7 39.1 40.8 42.9 45.3 47.5 51.0
  70 Years Old 26.9 30.2 32.3 34.5 36.9 39.0 41.3 43.3 46.5
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 14.6 16.6 17.8 19.0 20.1 21.5 22.6 25.0 26.8
  20 Years Old 37.1 40.2 42.5 44.8 46.6 48.9 51.2 55.0 59.4
  30 Years Old 42.8 46.2 48.4 50.5 52.5 54.4 56.8 59.9 63.7
  40 Years Old 41.1 44.9 47.4 49.4 51.0 52.8 54.8 57.2 60.5
  50 Years Old 38.0 42.1 44.8 46.9 48.3 50.0 51.8 53.9 57.2
  60 Years Old 35.2 39.3 41.9 44.0 45.4 47.1 49.1 50.9 54.3
  70 Years Old 32.0 35.3 37.6 39.7 41.4 43.1 45.2 46.9 50.1
Females
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 13.6 15.0 15.8 16.5 17.5 18.4 19.2 20.3 22.5
  20 Years Old 22.1 23.9 25.1 26.0 27.0 28.6 29.8 31.5 33.5
  30 Years Old 22.4 24.0 25.1 25.8 27.2 28.1 29.3 32.0 34.0
  40 Years Old 22.7 24.3 25.7 27.0 28.3 29.2 30.4 32.8 34.6
  50 Years Old 22.9 24.4 25.9 27.4 28.6 29.9 30.9 32.5 34.3
  60 Years Old 21.5 22.8 24.2 25.3 26.4 27.9 28.7 29.8 31.9
  70 Years Old 17.6 19.5 20.6 21.3 22.9 24.5 25.2 26.1 28.5
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 16.3 17.9 19.2 19.9 21.1 22.3 23.4 25.1 27.2
  20 Years Old 26.7 28.9 30.4 31.7 33.3 34.7 36.8 38.8 42.2
  30 Years Old 28.0 30.3 31.8 33.6 35.1 36.6 38.6 40.8 43.3
  40 Years Old 26.8 29.8 31.2 33.0 34.6 35.9 37.8 39.9 42.6
  50 Years Old 24.9 28.5 30.0 31.6 33.2 34.4 36.1 37.9 41.3
  60 Years Old 22.8 25.9 27.9 29.4 30.7 32.2 33.4 34.9 38.4
  70 Years Old 20.1 22.1 24.5 26.1 27.0 28.8 29.9 31.4 34.1
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 14.2 15.5 16.7 17.4 18.1 18.9 20.3 21.6 23.8
  20 Years Old 23.8 25.9 27.3 28.9 29.9 31.0 32.3 34.0 36.0
  30 Years Old 24.7 26.8 28.0 29.5 30.5 31.5 32.6 34.4 36.3
  40 Years Old 23.9 26.2 27.5 28.6 29.5 30.7 32.0 33.7 36.3
  50 Years Old 22.6 24.9 26.2 27.4 28.3 29.6 31.1 32.7 35.2
  60 Years Old 20.4 22.4 23.7 25.2 26.4 27.4 28.8 30.4 32.1
  70 Years Old 17.5 19.0 20.4 22.1 23.3 23.9 25.1 26.7 27.8
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 14.5 15.7 16.9 18.1 18.8 19.5 20.5 22.0 23.4
  20 Years Old 25.3 27.5 29.0 29.8 31.1 32.2 33.3 35.0 37.7
  30 Years Old 26.9 28.8 30.1 31.3 32.2 33.3 34.5 36.3 38.9
  40 Years Old 26.2 28.2 29.4 30.8 31.7 23.7 24.0 36.0 38.9
  50 Years Old 25.0 27.2 28.4 29.7 30.7 31.7 33.0 34.9 37.6
  60 Years Old 23.2 25.3 26.5 27.4 28.7 29.6 30.9 32.5 34.1
  70 Years Old 20.0 22.0 23.1 23.8 25.1 26.1 27.4 28.7 29.8
Open in a new tab

The 10 percentile curves for HGS relative to BMI with polynomials together and scatterplots by ethnicity for men are women are presented in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. There were differences in HGS normalized to BMI quantiles across ages for each ethnicity irrespective of gender. After a small dip in BMI normalized HGS from age 6–7 years in men, HGS normalized to BMI appeared to increase at 7 years and peaked at about 23 years of age, but began to decline at around 25 years of age for each ethnicity. Interestingly, HGS relative to BMI generally increased starting at 6 years of age but peaked before 20 years of age for women. This was then followed by observed reductions of BMI adjusted HGS occurring after 20 years of age. Table 4 presents an abbreviated amount of information for BMI normalized HGS quantiles for each age, gender, and ethnicity; whereas, Supplementary File 3 provides specific HGS normalized to BMI quantile values for each age, gender, and ethnicity.

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Handgrip Strength Normalized to Body Mass Index Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Men by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Open in a new tab

Handgrip Strength Normalized to Body Mass Index Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Women by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Table 4.

Abbreviated Body Mass Index Normalized Handgrip Strength Percentiles by Gender and Ethnicity.

Variables Percentile
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Males
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 0.79 0.85 0.90 0.94 1.00 1.03 1.14 1.25 1.37
  20 Years Old 1.30 1.53 1.61 1.72 1.79 1.89 1.99 2.12 2.31
  30 Years Old 1.35 1.54 1.66 1.77 1.85 1.95 2.03 2.14 2.30
  40 Years Old 1.39 1.49 1.63 1.72 1.81 1.88 1.96 2.03 2.19
  50 Years Old 1.39 1.45 1.58 1.66 1.74 1.81 1.88 1.96 2.10
  60 Years Old 1.28 1.37 1.46 1.55 1.63 1.70 1.76 1.88 1.98
  70 Years Old 1.06 1.19 1.27 1.36 1.45 1.52 1.58 1.71 1.77
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 0.86 0.94 1.01 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.28 1.34 1.44
  20 Years Old 1.28 1.51 1.66 1.81 1.94 2.06 2.20 2.33 2.53
  30 Years Old 1.35 1.55 1.66 1.81 1.92 2.05 2.20 2.34 2.54
  40 Years Old 1.31 1.47 1.59 1.72 1.82 1.92 2.05 2.19 2.37
  50 Years Old 1.21 1.37 1.50 1.62 1.73 1.81 1.93 2.08 2.25
  60 Years Old 1.06 1.25 1.38 1.50 1.62 1.70 1.82 2.00 2.17
  70 Years Old 0.89 1.13 1.24 1.36 1.47 1.56 1.69 1.86 2.02
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 0.70 0.79 0.85 0.93 0.99 1.05 1.12 1.19 1.30
  20 Years Old 1.22 1.40 1.54 1.65 1.79 1.90 2.01 2.13 2.31
  30 Years Old 1.22 1.40 1.52 1.60 1.72 1.83 1.95 2.08 2.22
  40 Years Old 1.22 1.35 1.45 1.52 1.60 1.70 1.78 1.93 2.09
  50 Years Old 1.18 1.30 1.38 1.46 1.52 1.61 1.68 1.82 2.00
  60 Years Old 1.06 1.19 1.27 1.34 1.42 1.51 1.59 1.71 1.86
  70 Years Old 0.90 1.05 1.13 1.18 1.27 1.35 1.46 1.53 1.62
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 0.78 0.89 0.95 1.02 1.07 1.15 1.23 1.32 1.44
  20 Years Old 1.36 1.55 1.67 1.81 1.94 2.06 2.16 2.28 2.50
  30 Years Old 1.38 1.54 1.70 1.82 1.93 2.04 2.12 2.23 2.46
  40 Years Old 1.30 1.43 1.59 1.71 1.80 1.89 1.96 2.06 2.26
  50 Years Old 1.21 1.36 1.48 1.61 1.70 1.78 1.86 1.95 2.13
  60 Years Old 1.13 1.28 1.40 1.51 1.60 1.67 1.77 1.89 2.04
  70 Years Old 1.03 1.18 1.29 1.37 1.46 1.53 1.63 1.76 1.89
Females
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 0.73 0.79 0.86 0.89 0.94 0.98 1.04 1.14 1.22
  20 Years Old 0.96 1.09 1.16 1.23 1.29 1.33 1.41 1.48 1.62
  30 Years Old 0.91 1.01 1.08 1.14 1.21 1.28 1.36 1.43 1.55
  40 Years Old 0.88 0.97 1.04 1.11 1.18 1.27 1.34 1.42 1.53
  50 Years Old 0.86 0.95 1.02 1.10 1.16 1.24 1.31 1.38 1.48
  60 Years Old 0.79 0.89 0.94 1.01 1.08 1.13 1.21 1.25 1.34
  70 Years Old 0.64 0.76 0.82 0.86 0.95 0.98 1.06 1.11 1.19
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 0.72 0.84 0.92 1.00 1.07 1.11 1.17 1.23 1.34
  20 Years Old 0.90 1.02 1.11 1.19 1.25 1.31 1.40 1.49 1.64
  30 Years Old 0.77 0.90 0.98 1.04 1.10 1.18 1.23 1.36 1.52
  40 Years Old 0.68 0.80 0.90 0.97 1.05 1.13 1.20 1.32 1.47
  50 Years Old 0.65 0.77 0.86 0.94 1.03 1.12 1.19 1.29 1.44
  60 Years Old 0.64 0.75 0.82 0.89 0.97 1.04 1.10 1.18 1.36
  70 Years Old 0.59 0.70 0.76 0.80 0.86 0.91 0.96 1.04 1.23
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 0.66 0.74 0.80 0.86 0.90 0.94 1.01 1.06 1.16
  20 Years Old 0.83 0.94 1.03 1.09 1.16 1.23 1.31 1.42 1.53
  30 Years Old 0.74 0.86 0.93 0.99 1.05 1.12 1.20 1.31 1.41
  40 Years Old 0.71 0.82 0.87 0.94 0.99 1.06 1.15 1.23 1.37
  50 Years Old 0.69 0.77 0.82 0.89 0.93 1.00 1.10 1.17 1.32
  60 Years Old 0.62 0.68 0.74 0.79 0.85 0.91 0.99 1.06 1.18
  70 Years Old 0.54 0.58 0.64 0.69 0.76 0.80 0.84 0.94 0.99
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 0.76 0.84 0.89 0.94 0.98 1.02 1.07 1.14 1.23
  20 Years Old 0.84 1.02 1.11 1.21 1.28 1.36 1.43 1.48 1.59
  30 Years Old 0.81 0.96 1.06 1.15 1.22 1.29 1.36 1.44 1.57
  40 Years Old 0.78 0.90 1.01 1.09 1.17 1.25 1.32 1.40 1.54
  50 Years Old 0.74 0.85 0.95 1.03 1.12 1.19 1.26 1.36 1.49
  60 Years Old 0.69 0.78 0.86 0.94 1.02 1.08 1.13 1.24 1.37
  70 Years Old 0.61 0.69 0.75 0.82 0.88 0.92 0.97 1.08 1.20
Open in a new tab

Similar results were observed when evaluating the dominant and non-dominant absolute HGS and BMI normalized HGS quantiles. HGS was generally stronger on the dominant hand compared to the dominant hand, regardless of gender and ethnicity. Figures 6 and 7 present the 10 percentile curves for absolute dominant HGS with polynomials together and scatter plots by ethnicity for men and women, respectively; whereas, Figures 8 and 9 show the 10 percentile curves for absolute non-dominant HGS with polynomials together and scatter plots by ethnicity for men and women, respectively. Table 5 shows an abbreviated amount of information for dominant absolute HGS quantiles by gender and ethnicity (full results are in Supplementary File 4); whereas, Table 6 presents an abbreviated amount of information for non-dominant absolute HGS quantiles by gender and ethnicity (full results are in Supplementary File 5). The 10 percentile curves for dominant HGS normalized to BMI with polynomials together and scatter plots by ethnicity for males and females are in Figures 10 and 11, respectively, while the 10 percentile curves for non-dominant HGS normalized to BMI with polynomials together and scatter plots by ethnicity for males and females are in Figures 12 and 13, respectively. Table 7 displays an abbreviated amount of information for BMI normalized dominant HGS quantiles by gender and ethnicity (full results are in Supplementary File 6) and Table 8 shows an abbreviated amount of information for BMI normalized non-dominant HGS quantiles by gender and ethnicity (full results are in Supplementary File 7).

Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Open in a new tab

Absolute Dominant Handgrip Strength Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Men by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Open in a new tab

Absolute Dominant Handgrip Strength Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Women by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Figure 8.

Figure 8.

Open in a new tab

Absolute Non-Dominant Handgrip Strength Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Men by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Figure 9.

Figure 9.

Open in a new tab

Absolute Non-Dominant Handgrip Strength Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Women by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Table 5.

Abbreviated Dominant Absolute Handgrip Strength Percentiles by Gender and Ethnicity.

Variables Percentile (kilograms)
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Males
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 14.1 15.6 16.8 17.9 19.0 20.2 21.6 22.6 24.4
  20 Years Old 32.2 35.1 37.0 38.5 41.1 42.8 44.5 47.1 51.1
  30 Years Old 36.3 38.4 40.7 42.7 45.0 46.7 49.1 51.5 55.2
  40 Years Old 36.1 38.0 41.2 43.0 44.6 45.9 48.3 50.2 53.5
  50 Years Old 34.6 36.5 40.0 41.5 43.0 44.1 46.1 47.8 50.7
  60 Years Old 31.9 33.5 36.2 37.9 39.8 41.1 42.8 44.5 47.1
  70 Years Old 27.7 29.0 30.8 32.5 34.6 36.0 37.5 39.5 42.3
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 15.5 17.7 19.3 20.9 21.8 22.8 23.9 26.0 27.5
  20 Years Old 36.1 40.5 43.1 45.8 48.3 50.4 52.9 55.5 58.9
  30 Years Old 41.2 45.6 48.2 50.9 53.0 55.6 58.3 60.7 65.3
  40 Years Old 40.7 44.6 47.4 49.5 51.0 53.8 56.0 58.5 63.0
  50 Years Old 37.7 41.6 44.6 46.4 48.0 50.6 52.7 55.6 59.4
  60 Years Old 33.1 37.7 40.5 42.5 44.6 46.9 49.7 52.7 55.9
  70 Years Old 27.0 32.4 35.3 37.6 40.2 42.4 45.4 48.2 50.7
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 14.7 16.2 17.3 18.4 19.5 20.6 21.8 23.1 25.3
  20 Years Old 33.6 37.4 40.3 42.4 44.9 47.7 49.5 53.2 56.6
  30 Years Old 38.0 42.0 44.9 46.6 48.4 51.1 52.9 56.3 60.3
  40 Years Old 37.2 40.7 43.0 44.6 46.1 47.7 50.0 52.4 56.5
  50 Years Old 34.2 37.8 39.9 41.6 43.2 44.4 47.1 49.2 52.9
  60 Years Old 30.0 34.0 36.7 38.4 40.2 42.1 44.4 47.2 50.2
  70 Years Old 26.0 29.6 32.2 34.1 35.8 38.6 39.8 43.3 46.1
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 14.5 16.1 17.6 18.7 19.7 21.3 22.4 24.6 26.5
  20 Years Old 36.3 39.6 42.0 44.1 46.2 48.5 50.7 54.1 58.9
  30 Years Old 41.5 45.2 47.6 49.2 51.7 53.6 56.1 59.1 63.0
  40 Years Old 39.6 43.7 46.2 48.1 50.1 51.8 54.0 56.5 60.0
  50 Years Old 36.7 40.9 43.5 45.8 47.4 48.9 51.0 53.2 56.8
  60 Years Old 34.3 37.9 40.7 43.0 44.8 46.1 48.2 50.4 53.8
  70 Years Old 31.2 33.9 36.7 38.7 40.9 42.3 44.5 46.6 49.4
Females
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 13.5 14.7 15.5 16.3 17.0 18.1 19.0 20.6 22.4
  20 Years Old 21.7 23.8 24.9 25.4 26.8 28.3 29.6 31.1 32.8
  30 Years Old 21.6 23.6 24.9 25.4 26.8 28.0 29.0 31.5 33.3
  40 Years Old 21.9 23.9 25.2 26.3 27.7 28.9 30.1 32.3 34.3
  50 Years Old 22.3 24.2 25.4 26.7 27.9 29.3 30.7 32.0 34.4
  60 Years Old 21.2 22.8 23.8 24.8 25.6 27.3 28.5 29.4 31.8
  70 Years Old 17.0 19.2 20.1 21.1 22.2 24.2 25.1 25.9 28.1
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 15.8 17.5 18.9 19.8 20.9 22.1 23.0 25.0 27.2
  20 Years Old 26.3 28.7 30.0 31.2 32.9 34.4 36.3 38.5 41.7
  30 Years Old 27.1 29.7 31.1 32.8 34.8 36.1 37.8 40.3 42.8
  40 Years Old 25.9 28.6 30.5 32.5 34.3 35.6 37.0 39.6 42.1
  50 Years Old 24.0 26.9 29.3 31.3 32.9 34.2 35.4 37.6 40.7
  60 Years Old 21.5 24.7 27.1 28.8 30.4 31.7 32.9 34.7 38.0
  70 Years Old 18.3 21.4 23.5 25.0 26.5 27.7 29.3 31.0 33.8
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 14.0 15.1 16.3 17.1 17.9 18.6 20.0 21.6 23.7
  20 Years Old 23.5 25.6 27.1 28.6 29.6 30.8 32.2 33.7 35.9
  30 Years Old 24.2 26.2 27.9 29.2 30.3 31.3 32.3 34.3 36.2
  40 Years Old 23.3 25.4 27.2 28.1 29.1 30.3 31.6 33.6 36.1
  50 Years Old 21.7 23.9 25.8 26.7 27.8 29.1 30.7 32.5 35.1
  60 Years Old 19.6 21.6 23.2 24.6 25.8 27.1 28.6 30.3 32.1
  70 Years Old 17.1 18.5 19.9 21.6 22.9 23.7 24.9 26.7 27.9
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 14.3 15.5 16.8 17.8 18.7 19.4 20.4 21.6 23.4
  20 Years Old 24.9 27.2 28.7 29.7 30.9 31.9 33.2 34.6 37.6
  30 Years Old 26.3 28.3 29.7 31.0 32.0 33.2 34.4 35.9 38.6
  40 Years Old 25.3 27.6 29.1 30.4 31.4 32.6 33.7 35.6 38.5
  50 Years Old 23.9 26.5 28.1 29.2 30.4 31.4 32.6 34.6 37.3
  60 Years Old 22.1 24.6 26.0 27.1 28.2 29.3 30.5 32.1 34.1
  70 Years Old 19.1 21.3 22.5 23.6 24.6 25.7 27.1 28.3 29.6
Open in a new tab

Table 6.

Abbreviated Non-Dominant Absolute Handgrip Strength Percentiles by Gender and Ethnicity.

Variables Percentile (kilograms)
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Males
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 12.6 13.8 15.8 17.0 17.9 19.0 20.2 22.0 23.7
  20 Years Old 29.7 32.4 34.3 36.6 38.5 40.3 41.9 44.5 46.9
  30 Years Old 32.5 36.2 37.6 39.7 41.5 43.2 45.1 48.4 51.3
  40 Years Old 33.8 36.4 38.2 39.8 41.2 42.7 44.7 47.0 50.8
  50 Years Old 33.3 35.2 37.1 38.6 39.8 41.4 43.3 44.7 48.0
  60 Years Old 29.7 32.1 33.7 35.3 36.9 38.6 40.1 42.1 43.7
  70 Years Old 24.3 27.2 28.7 30.3 32.3 33.8 35.3 38.3 39.7
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 15.3 16.7 18.3 19.5 20.8 21.9 23.4 24.4 26.6
  20 Years Old 33.6 37.0 40.4 43.2 45.4 47.7 49.9 52.6 56.3
  30 Years Old 39.0 41.9 45.8 49.4 51.3 53.2 55.8 58.7 62.6
  40 Years Old 38.7 41.8 44.7 48.0 49.5 51.5 53.8 56.5 60.6
  50 Years Old 35.3 39.2 41.3 44.1 45.8 48.4 50.3 53.0 57.1
  60 Years Old 30.0 34.9 37.1 39.9 42.1 45.0 47.1 49.9 53.5
  70 Years Old 24.5 29.7 32.6 35.4 38.1 40.3 43.0 45.7 48.7
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 13.6 15.1 16.5 17.5 18.6 19.7 20.8 22.0 24.6
  20 Years Old 32.5 35.8 37.9 40.2 42.7 44.8 47.1 50.2 53.9
  30 Years Old 37.1 40.1 42.5 44.4 46.1 48.1 50.6 53.5 57.2
  40 Years Old 35.7 38.6 40.9 42.4 43.8 45.7 47.7 50.4 54.2
  50 Years Old 32.3 35.4 37.7 39.3 41.3 42.9 44.7 47.4 50.8
  60 Years Old 28.4 31.7 33.9 36.2 38.7 39.9 42.2 44.9 47.5
  70 Years Old 23.9 27.6 29.5 32.0 34.4 35.2 38.6 40.7 43.0
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 13.7 15.2 16.2 17.7 19.0 20.4 21.4 23.4 26.2
  20 Years Old 33.4 36.9 39.5 41.6 43.8 45.8 48.2 51.2 55.0
  30 Years Old 39.2 42.4 45.1 47.0 49.0 51.3 53.3 55.5 59.5
  40 Years Old 38.2 42.1 44.7 46.5 48.0 49.9 51.9 54.0 57.7
  50 Years Old 35.5 39.8 42.6 44.4 45.8 47.4 49.3 51.6 55.0
  60 Years Old 32.8 36.7 39.3 41.3 43.1 44.6 46.1 48.5 51.7
  70 Years Old 29.4 32.3 34.6 36.8 38.9 40.6 41.9 44.0 46.9
Females
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 12.6 13.5 14.4 15.0 16.0 16.8 17.9 19.0 20.0
  20 Years Old 19.7 21.2 22.9 23.9 24.9 26.1 27.8 29.1 31.5
  30 Years Old 20.3 21.7 23.0 23.7 25.0 26.2 28.1 29.3 31.8
  40 Years Old 21.3 22.5 23.8 24.8 25.7 27.1 28.9 30.2 32.2
  50 Years Old 21.0 22.7 24.2 25.4 26.1 27.5 28.9 30.2 31.8
  60 Years Old 18.0 21.0 22.5 23.6 24.6 25.7 26.6 27.7 29.4
  70 Years Old 13.8 17.5 18.7 19.8 21.6 22.4 23.0 23.7 26.2
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 14.8 16.1 17.5 18.7 19.6 20.4 21.9 23.3 25.2
  20 Years Old 24.0 26.2 27.9 29.4 30.6 32.0 33.9 36.0 38.5
  30 Years Old 24.8 27.8 29.1 30.6 32.0 33.9 35.4 37.3 39.7
  40 Years Old 24.0 26.9 28.5 30.0 31.6 33.3 34.8 36.7 39.1
  50 Years Old 22.9 25.4 27.3 28.9 30.4 31.7 33.3 35.3 37.7
  60 Years Old 21.1 23.5 25.4 27.0 28.2 29.4 30.9 32.7 34.9
  70 Years Old 18.3 20.7 22.3 23.9 25.2 26.5 28.0 29.2 30.9
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 12.9 14.2 15.3 16.1 16.8 17.8 18.9 20.2 21.9
  20 Years Old 21.8 23.2 24.7 26.2 27.5 28.8 29.7 31.2 33.6
  30 Years Old 22.7 24.3 25.8 27.1 28.1 29.2 30.3 31.9 34.3
  40 Years Old 21.4 23.7 25.5 26.7 27.5 28.6 30.0 31.7 34.1
  50 Years Old 19.9 22.5 24.4 25.6 26.5 27.6 29.0 30.6 33.0
  60 Years Old 18.3 20.5 22.1 23.3 24.5 25.5 26.6 27.9 30.2
  70 Years Old 16.1 17.5 18.7 19.7 21.1 22.1 23.3 24.1 25.7
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 12.8 14.5 15.7 16.4 17.4 18.1 18.7 20.1 22.2
  20 Years Old 22.8 24.7 26.2 27.3 28.6 29.5 31.0 32.3 35.0
  30 Years Old 24.3 26.1 27.6 28.8 29.8 30.9 32.0 33.4 36.4
  40 Years Old 23.6 25.7 27.1 28.3 29.4 30.6 31.7 33.2 35.9
  50 Years Old 22.4 24.8 26.2 27.2 28.4 29.7 31.0 32.5 34.6
  60 Years Old 20.9 23.2 24.5 25.4 26.3 27.5 28.9 30.3 32.0
  70 Years Old 18.0 20.1 21.4 22.3 23.0 24.1 25.3 26.7 28.4
Open in a new tab

Figure 10.

Figure 10.

Open in a new tab

Dominant Handgrip Strength Normalized to Body Mass Index Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Men by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Figure 11.

Figure 11.

Open in a new tab

Dominant Handgrip Strength Normalized to Body Mass Index Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Women by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Figure 12.

Figure 12.

Open in a new tab

Non-Dominant Handgrip Strength Normalized to Body Mass Index Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Men by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Figure 13.

Figure 13.

Open in a new tab

Non-Dominant Handgrip Strength Normalized to Body Mass Index Centile Curves with Polynomials and Scatterplots for Women by Ethnicity. (A) non-Hispanic Asian; (B) non-Hispanic Black; (C) Hispanic; (D) non-Hispanic White. Note: kg = kilograms.

Table 7.

Abbreviated Body Mass Index Normalized Dominant Handgrip Strength Percentiles by Gender and Ethnicity.

Variables Percentile
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Males
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 0.79 0.84 0.89 0.94 0.98 1.03 1.13 1.22 1.36
  20 Years Old 1.27 1.50 1.58 1.70 1.76 1.87 1.97 2.10 2.28
  30 Years Old 1.32 1.51 1.65 1.75 1.83 1.93 2.02 2.12 2.29
  40 Years Old 1.36 1.47 1.62 1.70 1.78 1.85 1.95 2.02 2.19
  50 Years Old 1.35 1.44 1.55 1.63 1.71 1.77 1.87 1.94 2.10
  60 Years Old 1.23 1.35 1.42 1.51 1.59 1.68 1.74 1.86 1.97
  70 Years Old 1.00 1.15 1.24 1.33 1.42 1.51 1.56 1.69 1.75
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 0.83 0.91 0.98 1.04 1.10 1.17 1.24 1.33 1.42
  20 Years Old 1.26 1.48 1.64 1.78 1.87 2.02 2.17 2.30 2.49
  30 Years Old 1.34 1.53 1.63 1.76 1.88 2.01 2.15 2.31 2.51
  40 Years Old 1.29 1.43 1.53 1.68 1.79 1.88 1.99 2.18 2.33
  50 Years Old 1.18 1.32 1.44 1.59 1.69 1.77 1.87 2.07 2.20
  60 Years Old 1.03 1.22 1.34 1.46 1.55 1.65 1.77 1.95 2.11
  70 Years Old 0.88 1.10 1.21 1.30 1.39 1.52 1.65 1.79 1.97
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 0.68 0.77 0.84 0.91 0.98 1.04 1.09 1.16 1.28
  20 Years Old 1.18 1.36 1.53 1.64 1.75 1.85 1.97 2.11 2.28
  30 Years Old 1.16 1.36 1.50 1.58 1.67 1.78 1.92 2.05 2.21
  40 Years Old 1.18 1.33 1.43 1.50 1.56 1.67 1.76 1.89 2.08
  50 Years Old 1.15 1.29 1.36 1.43 1.50 1.59 1.66 1.79 1.98
  60 Years Old 1.02 1.16 1.25 1.32 1.41 1.48 1.57 1.69 1.84
  70 Years Old 0.85 1.00 1.10 1.15 1.24 1.31 1.42 1.52 1.61
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 0.77 0.85 0.93 1.00 1.06 1.13 1.20 1.30 1.43
  20 Years Old 1.35 1.52 1.65 1.80 1.93 2.04 2.15 2.27 2.48
  30 Years Old 1.38 1.53 1.66 1.79 1.91 2.00 2.10 2.22 2.45
  40 Years Old 1.26 1.42 1.55 1.66 1.75 1.85 1.92 2.03 2.24
  50 Years Old 1.15 1.33 1.45 1.55 1.65 1.74 1.82 1.93 2.10
  60 Years Old 1.07 1.24 1.35 1.45 1.57 1.64 1.73 1.86 2.01
  70 Years Old 0.98 1.14 1.24 1.33 1.45 1.50 1.60 1.74 1.87
Females
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 0.71 0.77 0.84 0.88 0.92 0.99 1.04 1.11 1.23
  20 Years Old 0.96 1.09 1.16 1.22 1.27 1.31 1.39 1.47 1.60
  30 Years Old 0.89 1.00 1.07 1.13 1.19 1.27 1.33 1.43 1.52
  40 Years Old 0.85 0.94 1.03 1.09 1.17 1.25 1.32 1.42 1.51
  50 Years Old 0.83 0.92 1.01 1.07 1.15 1.22 1.29 1.37 1.47
  60 Years Old 0.76 0.88 0.94 0.99 1.05 1.12 1.18 1.25 1.33
  70 Years Old 0.61 0.75 0.79 0.85 0.91 0.98 1.05 1.11 1.18
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 0.71 0.82 0.89 0.99 1.04 1.10 1.15 1.23 1.35
  20 Years Old 0.88 0.99 1.09 1.18 1.25 1.31 1.37 1.47 1.61
  30 Years Old 0.75 0.86 0.97 1.03 1.08 1.17 1.22 1.33 1.49
  40 Years Old 0.66 0.79 0.89 0.96 1.03 1.12 1.18 1.29 1.46
  50 Years Old 0.63 0.76 0.84 0.93 1.02 1.10 1.17 1.26 1.43
  60 Years Old 0.61 0.72 0.79 0.87 0.96 1.02 1.09 1.17 1.33
  70 Years Old 0.57 0.65 0.72 0.78 0.84 0.89 0.95 1.03 1.20
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 0.65 0.72 0.79 0.85 0.90 0.94 0.99 1.05 1.16
  20 Years Old 0.82 0.94 1.01 1.08 1.15 1.23 1.30 1.40 1.52
  30 Years Old 0.74 0.85 0.90 0.97 1.03 1.11 1.19 1.30 1.41
  40 Years Old 0.70 0.80 0.85 0.92 0.97 1.03 1.13 1.23 1.37
  50 Years Old 0.66 0.75 0.81 0.87 0.93 0.98 1.08 1.16 1.32
  60 Years Old 0.60 0.68 0.73 0.77 0.84 0.89 0.97 1.05 1.17
  70 Years Old 0.51 0.57 0.63 0.67 0.74 0.80 0.84 0.91 0.98
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 0.73 0.81 0.87 0.93 0.98 1.02 1.06 1.13 1.22
  20 Years Old 0.84 0.99 1.10 1.19 1.26 1.35 1.42 1.48 1.59
  30 Years Old 0.79 0.95 1.04 1.13 1.20 1.28 1.35 1.42 1.57
  40 Years Old 0.75 0.89 0.99 1.07 1.16 1.23 1.30 1.40 1.53
  50 Years Old 0.72 0.84 0.94 1.01 1.10 1.17 1.25 1.36 1.47
  60 Years Old 0.66 0.76 0.85 0.92 1.00 1.06 1.13 1.24 1.36
  70 Years Old 0.59 0.68 0.74 0.81 0.86 0.91 0.96 1.07 1.19
Open in a new tab

Table 8.

Abbreviated Body Mass Index Normalized Non-Dominant Handgrip Strength Percentiles by Gender and Ethnicity.

Variables Percentile
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Males
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 0.71 0.78 0.81 0.86 0.91 0.99 1.07 1.13 1.33
  20 Years Old 1.18 1.37 1.49 1.59 1.65 1.73 1.85 1.95 2.12
  30 Years Old 1.20 1.37 1.53 1.64 1.70 1.78 1.88 1.96 2.11
  40 Years Old 1.26 1.38 1.52 1.60 1.65 1.74 1.82 1.89 2.04
  50 Years Old 1.28 1.38 1.47 1.53 1.60 1.68 1.75 1.82 1.96
  60 Years Old 1.17 1.26 1.34 1.41 1.50 1.58 1.64 1.71 1.82
  70 Years Old 0.96 1.03 1.15 1.24 1.35 1.41 1.46 1.53 1.64
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 0.77 0.86 0.93 0.98 1.05 1.14 1.19 1.29 1.34
  20 Years Old 1.17 1.39 1.53 1.66 1.79 1.90 2.04 2.19 2.36
  30 Years Old 1.25 1.40 1.56 1.69 1.80 1.89 2.06 2.22 2.38
  40 Years Old 1.22 1.35 1.46 1.58 1.67 1.78 1.94 2.10 2.20
  50 Years Old 1.11 1.26 1.36 1.46 1.55 1.68 1.82 1.98 2.09
  60 Years Old 0.96 1.13 1.26 1.36 1.46 1.57 1.69 1.85 2.03
  70 Years Old 0.80 0.99 1.16 1.26 1.36 1.43 1.54 1.68 1.92
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 0.63 0.74 0.80 0.86 0.92 0.99 1.05 1.12 1.23
  20 Years Old 1.14 1.28 1.42 1.53 1.65 1.76 1.88 2.01 2.18
  30 Years Old 1.14 1.28 1.39 1.50 1.58 1.70 1.82 1.94 2.13
  40 Years Old 1.14 1.26 1.34 1.42 1.49 1.59 1.69 1.79 2.00
  50 Years Old 1.10 1.20 1.29 1.36 1.44 1.51 1.60 1.70 1.90
  60 Years Old 0.96 1.06 1.17 1.25 1.34 1.40 1.50 1.59 1.77
  70 Years Old 0.78 0.91 1.02 1.10 1.17 1.24 1.34 1.43 1.56
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 0.73 0.81 0.88 0.92 0.99 1.07 1.17 1.25 1.37
  20 Years Old 1.21 1.43 1.56 1.69 1.80 1.93 2.03 2.14 2.34
  30 Years Old 1.26 1.45 1.57 1.70 1.80 1.91 1.99 2.10 2.28
  40 Years Old 1.20 1.36 1.48 1.61 1.70 1.78 1.87 1.96 2.13
  50 Years Old 1.12 1.28 1.39 1.53 1.62 1.69 1.78 1.87 2.03
  60 Years Old 1.02 1.19 1.30 1.43 1.51 1.58 1.69 1.80 1.94
  70 Years Old 0.92 1.08 1.18 1.28 1.35 1.43 1.53 1.67 1.77
Females
 Non-Hispanic Asian
  10 Years Old 0.68 0.73 0.77 0.82 0.85 0.92 0.97 1.00 1.16
  20 Years Old 0.85 0.94 1.06 1.11 1.18 1.24 1.31 1.40 1.51
  30 Years Old 0.83 0.89 1.00 1.06 1.12 1.18 1.27 1.36 1.47
  40 Years Old 0.81 0.90 0.97 1.04 1.10 1.15 1.24 1.31 1.42
  50 Years Old 0.76 0.88 0.95 1.02 1.08 1.13 1.21 1.27 1.36
  60 Years Old 0.65 0.79 0.87 0.95 0.99 1.06 1.12 1.19 1.25
  70 Years Old 0.52 0.64 0.74 0.82 0.85 0.94 1.01 1.07 1.10
 Non-Hispanic Black
  10 Years Old 0.66 0.78 0.86 0.92 0.99 1.04 1.08 1.14 1.25
  20 Years Old 0.81 0.94 1.00 1.08 1.15 1.20 1.29 1.38 1.52
  30 Years Old 0.70 0.82 0.90 0.96 1.01 1.06 1.15 1.25 1.40
  40 Years Old 0.63 0.75 0.83 0.88 0.96 1.02 1.10 1.22 1.39
  50 Years Old 0.60 0.71 0.79 0.85 0.94 1.02 1.09 1.20 1.36
  60 Years Old 0.58 0.67 0.74 0.82 0.90 0.96 1.02 1.10 1.23
  70 Years Old 0.52 0.62 0.70 0.76 0.81 0.84 0.91 0.97 1.08
 Hispanic
  10 Years Old 0.60 0.69 0.74 0.79 0.84 0.88 0.92 0.99 1.11
  20 Years Old 0.76 0.85 0.92 0.98 1.07 1.14 1.20 1.29 1.42
  30 Years Old 0.70 0.78 0.85 0.92 0.99 1.05 1.12 1.19 1.30
  40 Years Old 0.66 0.74 0.81 0.88 0.94 0.99 1.07 1.14 1.25
  50 Years Old 0.62 0.70 0.76 0.82 0.88 0.93 1.02 1.10 1.21
  60 Years Old 0.56 0.64 0.68 0.74 0.79 0.85 0.93 0.99 1.10
  70 Years Old 0.49 0.55 0.58 0.64 0.69 0.75 0.79 0.84 0.92
 Non-Hispanic White
  10 Years Old 0.68 0.77 0.81 0.86 0.90 0.95 1.01 1.06 1.14
  20 Years Old 0.79 0.93 1.02 1.10 1.17 1.23 1.30 1.38 1.46
  30 Years Old 0.75 0.87 0.97 1.05 1.12 1.19 1.26 1.34 1.43
  40 Years Old 0.71 0.82 0.92 1.01 1.08 1.15 1.23 1.32 1.42
  50 Years Old 0.67 0.77 0.87 0.95 1.03 1.10 1.19 1.27 1.39
  60 Years Old 0.61 0.71 0.79 0.86 0.93 1.00 1.08 1.17 1.27
  70 Years Old 0.54 0.63 0.69 0.75 0.81 0.85 0.92 1.01 1.11
Open in a new tab

DISCUSSION

This investigation provided absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI percentiles by gender and ethnicity for Americans aged 6–80 years. Individuals could use these HGS centiles for comparing their HGS capacity to their American peers. Acknowledgement should be given to how gender and ethnicity factor into strength capacity throughout the lifespan, and how health outcomes from low muscle strength impact each gender and ethnicity differently. Moreover, utilizing both absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI in assessments of strength capacity will provide more detailed insights into how body composition influences muscle strength.

While our investigation provided HGS centiles for Americans aged 6–80 years by gender and ethnicity, other investigations have found similar results in cohorts from other countries. Kenny et al. [26] provided percentiles for absolute HGS by gender for Irish adults aged 50–85 years, whereas Dodds et al. [27] revealed normative centiles for British persons aged 4–90 years. HGS values for Canadians aged 6–79 years are also comparable to our findings [28]. Further, our findings parallel with those from Peterson and Krishnan [29], who provided gender-specific HGS percentiles for Americans aged 6–80 years with NHANES data. Although our results mostly align with previous investigations that have evaluated gender-specific HGS centiles at different ages [19,26,27,29,30], our findings show that ethnicity is also a factor that influences strength in Americans during the lifespan. The differences we observed in our HGS percentiles for each ethnicity support those who suggest demographic characteristics such as ethnicity need to be considered for risk stratification related to weakness and interventions aiming to improve strength capacity [31]. Therefore, we agree with previous conclusions that suggest different standards for skeletal muscle and strength capacity should be applicable to each ethnicity [10,14].

Although absolute HGS provides easily interpretable information that is associated with a variety of health outcomes [2], body composition also factors into muscle strength and should be accounted for when evaluating HGS [14,32]. Our findings also provide HGS normalized to BMI quantiles by gender and ethnicity for Americans aged 6–80 years. While muscle strength changes throughout the life course for each gender and ethnicity, BMI also changes [33]. For example, BMI is a surrogate measure of body fat that is often used in population-based studies [34], and the higher BMI seen at older age is often attributed to age-related reductions in muscle mass and increases in adipose tissue [35]. The results of our investigation showed that measures of absolute HGS mostly tended to peak at around 30 years of age regardless of gender and ethnicity, but measures of HGS relative to BMI peaked earlier in life, especially for women (i.e., before 20 years of age). This further demonstrates the importance of acknowledging the role of body composition on strength capacity. Our findings are also in agreement with those from Wang et al. [36] such that HGS is generally stronger in the dominant hand compared to the non-dominant hand; however, handedness may change over the lifespan [15], and HGS can also be greater in the non-dominant relative to the dominant hand at older age [36]. We recommend that both absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI be evaluated for any thresholds and centiles of HGS, and consideration be given to what hand is being measured during HGS testing. We also recommend that our results be used to help develop validated cut-off points for appropriate sarcopenia diagnoses [9].

Some limitations of the reported data should be acknowledged. Although our HGS centiles are generalizable for Americans, the HGS protocols in the NHANES may differ from other HGS protocols, which in turn, may influence HGS values. The dip seen from 6–7 years of age for our quantiles may be best explained by model fitting in our analyses. Sampling was also higher for certain ages, genders, and ethnicities than others. Although HGS was used in this investigation for measuring muscle strength, data for other measures of strength capacity such as knee extension strength were not available in the NHANES and could not be analyzed. While HGS normalized to BMI helps to account for the role of body composition in strength capacity, it is challenging to determine if differences in HGS relative to BMI across the lifespan are due to changes absolute HGS, BMI, or both. Nevertheless, the use of BMI is still recommended when normalizing HGS to a measure of body composition [14]. We recommend that HGS centiles continue to be monitored and updated in Americans of all ages, genders, and ethnicities, including the creation of HGS centiles in special (e.g., persons with disabilities) and morbid populations. Evaluating HGS centiles for morbid populations may help to distinguish strength capacity in populations that are “healthy” and “not-healthy”.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide percentile charts for absolute HGS and HGS normalized to BMI by gender and ethnicity for Americans aged 6–80 years. The role of age, gender, and ethnicity should be acknowledged when evaluating strength capacity. Consideration should also be given to the hand being measured during HGS testing. We recommend that health practitioners working with persons of all ages utilize measures of HGS for determining strength capacity, and compare their HGS values to the appropriate population-representative growth charts. Understanding such information may help to better identify those at risk for future weakness. Changing strength capacity trajectories through interventions aiming to improve muscle strength may help to prevent adverse health outcomes associated with low muscle strength.

Supplementary Material

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Acknowledgments

FUNDING

RPM was funded by the College of Human Sciences and Education at North Dakota State University. BCC’s effort on this project was supported, in part, by grant R01AG044424 from the National Institute on Aging.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

WJK was a consultant to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. In the past 5 years BCC has received research funding from the NIH, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Astellas Pharma Global Development Inc., RTI Health Solutions, and the Osteopathic Heritage Foundations. In the past 5 years BCC has consulted with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Abbott Laboratories, and the Gerson Lehrman Group. Additionally, BCC is co-founder with equity, and services as the Chief of Aging Research of AEIOU Scientific LLC. The other authors have no competing interests to report.

ABBREVIATIONS

BMI

Body Mass Index

HGS

Handgrip Strength

NHANES

National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

Footnotes

DATA AVAILABILITY

All data are publicly available for download at the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey website (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/Default.aspx).

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS

The supplementary materials are available online at https://doi.org/10.20900/agmr.20200005.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Bohannon RW. Muscle strength: clinical and prognostic value of hand-grip dynamometry. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2015;18:465–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.McGrath RP, Kraemer WJ, Snih SA, Peterson MD. Handgrip Strength and Health in Aging Adults. Sports Med. 2018;48:1993–2000. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Sayer AA, Syddall H, Martin H, Patel H, Baylis D, Cooper C. The developmental origins of sarcopenia. J Nutr Health Aging. 2008;12:427–32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ooi PH, Thompson-Hodgetts S, Pritchard-Wiart L, Gilmour SM, Mager DR. Pediatric Sarcopenia: A Paradigm in the Overall Definition of Malnutrition in Children? JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019. doi: 10.1002/jpen.1681 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ortega FB, Silventoinen K, Tynelius P, Rasmussen F. Muscular strength in male adolescents and premature death: cohort study of one million participants. BMJ. 2012;345:e7279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Leong DP, Teo KK, Rangarajan S, Lopez-Jaramillo P, Avezum A Jr, Orlandini A, et al. Prognostic value of grip strength: findings from the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Lancet. 2015;386:266–73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Physical Activity Gidelines for Americans. 2nd ed. Washington, DC (US): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Cesari M, Araujo de Carvalho I, Amuthavalli Thiyagarajan J, Cooper C, Martin FC, Reginster JY, et al. Evidence for the domains supporting the construct of intrinsic capacity. J Gerontol A. 2018;73(12):1653–60. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Bahat G, Bauer J, Boirie Y, Bruyère O, Cederholm T, et al. Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing. 2019;48(1):16–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Silva AM, Shen W, Heo M, Gallagher D, Wang Z, Sardinha LB, et al. Ethnicity-related skeletal muscle differences across the lifespan. Am J Hum Biol. 2010;22:76–82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.McLean RR, Shardell MD, Alley DE, Cawthon PM, Fragala MS, Harris TB, et al. Criteria for clinically relevant weakness and low lean mass and their longitudinal association with incident mobility impairment and mortality: the foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) sarcopenia project. J Gerontol A. 2014;69:576–83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Duchowny KA, Peterson MD, Clarke PJ. Cut Points for Clinical Muscle Weakness Among Older Americans. Am J Prev Med. 2017;53:63–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.McGrath RP, Ottenbacher KJ, Vincent BM, Kraemer WJ, Peterson MD. Muscle weakness and functional limitations in an ethnically diverse sample of older adults. Ethn Health. 2017;1–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Cawthon PM, Travison TG, Manini TM, Patel S, Pencina KM, Fielding RA, et al. Establishing the Link Between Lean Mass and Grip Strength Cut Points With Mobility Disability and Other Health Outcomes: Proceedings of the Sarcopenia Definition and Outcomes Consortium Conference. J Gerontol A. 2019. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glz081 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Sivagnanasunderam M, Gonzalez DA, Bryden PJ, Young G, Forsyth A, Roy EA. Handedness throughout the lifespan: cross-sectional view on sex differences as asymmetries change. Front Psychol. 2015;5:1556. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Overview. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes_13_14/NHANES_Overview_Brochure.pdf. Accessed 2019 Aug 9.
  • 17.National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: Plan and Operations, 1999–2010. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_01/sr01_056.pdf. Accessed 2019 Aug 9. [PubMed]
  • 18.National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Response Rates and Population Totals. Available from: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/ResponseRates.aspx. Accessed 2019 Aug 9.
  • 19.Perna FM, Coa K, Troiano RP, Lawman HG, Wang CY, Li Y, et al. Muscular Grip Strength Estimates of the US Population From the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011–2012. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30:867–74. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Muscle Strength Procedures Manual. Available from: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/2011-2012/manuals/Muscle_Strength_Proc_Manual.pdf. Accessed 2019 Aug 9.
  • 21.National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Muscle Strength Procedures Manual. Available from: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/2013-2014/manuals/Muscle_Strength_2013.pdf Accessed 2019 Aug 9.
  • 22.Rodriguez RN, Yao Y. Five Things You Should Know about Quantile Regression. Available from: https://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings17/SAS0525-2017.pdf Accessed 2019 Aug 9.
  • 23.Chen CJ. Growth Charts of Body Mass Index (BMI) With Quantile Regression. AMCS. 2005;5:114–20. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: Analytic Guidelines, 2011–2014 and 2015–2016. Available from: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/2011-2012/analyticguidelines/analytic_guidelines_11_16.pdf. Accessed 2019 Aug 9.
  • 25.Slaughter S, Delwiche LD. Using PROC SGPLOT for Quick High-Quality Graphs Available from: http://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings10/154-2010.pdf. Accessed 2019 Aug 9.
  • 26.Kenny RA, Coen RF, Frewen J, Donoghue OA, Cronin H, Savva GM. Normative values of cognitive and physical function in older adults: findings from the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2013;61:S279–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Dodds RM, Syddall HE, Cooper R, Benzeval M, Deary IJ, Dennison EM, et al. Grip strength across the life course: normative data from twelve British studies. PLoS One. 2014;9:e113637. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Wong SL. Reduced muscular strength among Canadians aged 60 to 79: Canadian Health Measures Survey, 2007 to 2013. Health Rep. 2016;27:11–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Peterson MD, Krishnan C. Growth Charts for Muscular Strength Capacity With Quantile Regression. Am J Prev Med. 2015;49:935–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Spruit M, Sillen M, Groenen M, Wouters EF, Franssen FM. New Normative Values for Handgrip Strength: Results From the UK Biobank. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013;14:775.e5–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Germain CM, Vasquez E, Batsis JA, McQuoid DR. Sex, race and age differences in muscle strength and limitations in community dwelling older adults: Data from the Health and Retirement Survey (HRS). Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2016;65:98–103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.McGrath R Comparing absolute handgrip strength and handgrip strength normalized to body weight in aging adults. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019;31(12):1851–3. doi: 10.1007/s40520-019-01126-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Fryar CD, Kruszan-Moran D, Gu Q, Ogden CL. Mean body weight, weight, waist circumference, and body mass index among adults: United States, 1999–2000 through 2015–2016. Natl Health Stat Report. 2018;122:1–16. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Body Mass Index: Considerations for Practitioners. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/downloads/bmiforpactitioners.pdf Accessed 2019 Sep 3.
  • 35.Zamboni M, Mazzali G, Fantin F, Rossi A, Di Francesco V. Sarcopenic obesity: a new category of obesity in the elderly. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2008;18:388–95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Wang Y-C, Bohannon RW, Li X, Sindhu B, Kapellusch J. Hand-grip strength: Normative reference values and equations for individuals 18 to 85 years of age residing in the United States. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2018;48(9):685–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

1
NIHMS1066034-supplement-1.xlsx (9.9KB, xlsx)
2
NIHMS1066034-supplement-2.xlsx (94.9KB, xlsx)
3
NIHMS1066034-supplement-3.xlsx (93.1KB, xlsx)
4
NIHMS1066034-supplement-4.xlsx (94KB, xlsx)
5
NIHMS1066034-supplement-5.xlsx (93.1KB, xlsx)
6
NIHMS1066034-supplement-6.xlsx (93.8KB, xlsx)
7
NIHMS1066034-supplement-7.xlsx (92.2KB, xlsx)

RESOURCES