4.6 Article

Dose-response association of handgrip strength and risk of depression: a longitudinal study of 115 601 older adults from 24 countries

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
卷 222, 期 3, 页码 135-142

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.2022.178

关键词

Muscle; mental disorder; epidemiology; prevention; burden of disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the association between handgrip strength and risk of depression in adults aged 50 years and over. It found that there was an inverse significant association between handgrip strength and depression up to a specific threshold of 40 kg in men and 27 kg in women.
BackgroundPrior research has solely focused on the association between handgrip strength and risk of depression in single countries or general populations, but more knowledge is required from wider-spread cohorts and target populations. AimsThis study aimed to investigate the association between handgrip strength and risk of depression using repeated measures in adults aged 50 years and over. MethodData on handgrip strength and risk of depression were retrieved from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) waves 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7, using a hand dynamometer (Smedley, S Dynamometer, TTM) and the EURO-D 12-item scale, respectively. Time-varying exposure and covariates were modelled using both Cox regression and restricted cubic splines. ResultsA total of 115 601 participants (mean age 64.3 years (s.d. = 9.9), 54.3% women) were followed-up for a median of 7.3 years (interquartile range: 3.9-11.8) and 792 459 person-years. During this period, 30 208 (26.1%) participants experienced a risk of depression. When modelled as a continuous variable, we observed an inverse significant association for each kg increase of handgrip strength and depression up to 40 kg in men and up to 27 kg in women. ConclusionsBeing physically strong may serve as a preventive factor for depression in older adults, but this is limited up to a maximum specific threshold for men and women.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据