Skip to main content
. 2021 Feb 4;13:625551. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2021.625551

Table 1.

Characteristics of the included studies.

Study Country, setting Population, sample size Follow-up period(year) Muscle strength assessment Cognitive function assessment Outcome Statistical model Effect measures
Doi et al. (2019) Japan, community-dwelling Older adults ≥ 65 years,52% women without dementia,4,086 3.6 Measured once; Smedley-type handheld dynamometer Recorded data collected by the Japanese Health Insurance System Incident dementia Cox proportional hazards models HR 1.39 (0.89–2.17)
Jeong et al. (2018) Korea, community-dwelling Older women without cognitive impairment aged 65 years or older, 544 8 Measured twice for each hand and averaged the maximum value from each hand; dynamometer MMSE of Korean version scores; cognitive dysfunction: MMSE <2 4 Cognitive decline Logistic and linear regression analyses aOR 2.28 (1.23–4.24)
Sibbett et al. (2018) Scotland, community-dwelling Aged ~79 years (57% women), without dementia, 416 16 Measured three times in the dominant hand and used the best; Jamar Hydraulic Hand Dynamometer Collected from death certificates, electronic hospital records, and clinical reviews Incident dementia Cox Regression HR 0.98 (0.94–1.02)
Heward et al. (2018) Tanzania, community-dwelling Adults aged 65 years and over without cognitive dysfunction (57% women), 305 2 Measured three times in the dominant hand and used the best; Jamar hydraulic hand dynamometer IDEA cognitive screen; A score of ≤7: probable cognitive impairment; A score of 8–9: possible cognitive impairment Cognitive decline Multivariable binary logistic regression OR 3.93 (1.70–9.11)
Jeong et al. (2018) Korea, community-dwelling Adults aged ≥ 45 years without cognitive dysfunction (50% women),6435 5.21 The mean of the maximum handgrip strength from both hands MMSE of Korean version score; cognitive dysfunction: MMSE <24 Incident cognitive dysfunction Cox proportional hazard models HR 1.39 (1.17–1.67)
Hooghiemstra et al. (2017) Netherlands, memory clinic Age of 55 years or older and subjective or objective cognitive impairment but no dementia (35% women), 263 2.1 ± 1.2 Measured twice for the dominant hand and used the mean value; hydraulic hand dynamometer MMSE; RAVLT; VAT; Digit Span; LDST; SCWT; TMT; MCI: based on clinical judgment, the Petersen criteria Progression to MCI or dementia for SCD and to dementia for MCI Cox proportional hazard models HR 1.05 (0.76–1.46); Stratified by baseline cognitive function: SCD, HR 1.13 (0.63–2.03); MCI, HR 1.06 (0.70–1.60)
Dementia: DSM-IV-TR; AD: NIA-AA criteria Stratified by age: ≤65y: HR 1.05 (0.58-1.87);>65y: HR 1.09 (0.75–1.60)
Camargo et al. (2016) USA, community-dwelling Framingham Offspring, mean age 62 ± 9 years (54% women), 2,046 6.5 Measured three times of each hand and recorded the maximum; Jamar Hydraulic Hand Dynamometer MMSE and standardized neuropsychological test battery; Dementia: DSM-IV, and along with symptoms for at least 6 months Incident dementia and AD Cox proportional hazard models For the entire study sample: Dementia: HR 2.17 (1.00–4.69); AD: HR 2.75 (1.18–6.39)
AD, NINCDS-ADRDA ≥65 years: Dementia: HR 2.38 (1.05–5.39); AD:HR 3.22 (1.31–7.90)
Veronese et al. (2016) Italy,community-dwelling Older adults aged ≥65 years (59% women), 1,249 4 Measured three times of each hand and used the maximum; JAMAR hand-held dynamometer 30-items MMSE Onset of cognitive decline Multinomial logistic regression AD: HR 3.22 (1.31–7.90)
Gray et al. (2013) USA, community-dwelling Aged 65 years and older without dementia (60% women), 2,619 6.5 ± 3.9 Measured three times in the dominant hand and used the best; handheld dynamometer CASI; a cutoff value of 86 on the CASI to identify individuals for dementia evaluation. Incident dementia, AD and non-AD dementia Cox proportional hazards regression models Dementia: HR 1.06 (0.87–1.29); Possible or Probable AD: HR 1.04 (0.84–1.28); Non-AD Dementia: HR 1.28 (0.77–2.11)
Sattler et al. (2011) Germany, community-dwelling Healthy participants from the 1930–32 birth cohort, an average age of 74 years, 323 12 Assessed with the aid of the “Martin-Vigorimeter”, subjects press a ball alternating between two hands for four trials and used the maximum. MCI: AACD criteria; AD: the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria; VaD: the NINDS-AIREN criteria Prevalence of MCI/AD Logistic regression analyses OR 1.00 (0.99–1.01)
Boyle et al. (2009) USA, community-dwelling older persons without dementia, mean age 80.3 ± 7.5 years (75% women), 970 3.6 Measured bilaterally and used the average using the Jamar® hydraulic hand dynamometers. 21 tests and MMSE; AD: NINCDS-ADRDA criteria; MCI: had cognitive impairment but did not meet criteria for dementia Risk of AD Core proportional hazards model HR 0.61 (0.47–0.80)
Buchman et al. (2007) USA, religious communities Older Catholic clergy members (70% women), 843, excluding 34 participants who had a clinical stroke at baseline or during the course of the study; ≥67 years 5.7 Measured twice for each hand and averaged the four trials. Jamar hydraulic hand dynamometer. 20 cognitive performance tests. Dementia: NINCDS-ADRDA criteria; AD: a history of cognitive decline and evidence of impairment in two or more domains of cognition, and one must be memory. Risk of AD Cox proportional hazards models HR 0.981 (0.968–0.994)
Kim et al. (2019) Korea, community-dwelling Aged 50 and over (54.5% women), 5,995 8 Measured twice for each hand and used the mean value. Handheld dynamometer. Korean version of the MMSE; Mild cognitive impairment: K-MMSE score of 18–23; Dementia: K-MMSE score ≤ 17 Cognitive impairment 2-years lagged general estimating equations (GEE) OR 0.499 (0.422–0.589)
Moon et al. (2016) Korea, community-dwelling Aged 65 years or more, cognitively normal (47% women), 297 5 Measured twice consecutively for the dominant hand with a 1-min interval, and used the averaged value. CERAD-K Clinical Assessment Batter and M.I.N.I.; MCI: the diagnostic criteria proposed by the International Working Group. Dementia: DSM-IV Progression of cognitively normal to MCI or dementia Multivariate binary logistic regression analysis HR 1.337 (0.281–6.368)
Hatabe et al. (2020) Japan, community-dwelling Community-dwellers of late-life aged 60–79 without dementia (57% women),1055 14.6 ± 7.3 Measured twice for each hand and used the maximum value; Smedley hand dynamometer MMSE and Hasegawa's Dementia Scale revised; Dementia: DSM-IV; AD: NINCDS-ADRDA; VaD: NINDS-AIREN criteria Risk of developing dementia Cox proportional hazards models Total dementia: HR1.66 (1.29-2.13); AD: HR 1.94 (1.41-2.67); VaD: HR 2.07 (1.32–3.25)
Community-dwellers of middle-life aged 45–64 without dementia, 835 Total dementia: HR 1.29 (0.996–1.67);AD:HR 1.46 (1.05–2.03); VaD: HR 1.07 (0.66–1.74)

MMSE, mini-mental state examination; IDEA, Identification and Intervention for Dementia in Elderly Africans; RAVLT, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test; VAT, Visual Association Test; LDST, Letter Digit Substitution Test; SCWT, Stroop Color Word Test; TMT, Trail Making Test; DSM-IV-TR, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth Edition, text revision; NIA-AA, National Institute of Aging-Alzheimer's Association; CASI, Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument; AACD, aging-associated cognitive decline; NINCDS-ADRDA, National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke and the Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association; VaD, Vascular Dementia; NINDS-AIREN, National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke and Association Internationale pour la Recherche et l'Enseignement en Neurosciences; DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth Edition; CERAD-K, Korean Version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease; M.I.N.I., The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview.