3.9 Article

Gender Differences in Anthropometric Predictors of Physical Performance in Older Adults

期刊

GENDER MEDICINE
卷 9, 期 6, 页码 445-456

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.genm.2012.10.004

关键词

aging; body composition; muscle strength; muscle mass; physical function

资金

  1. Brookdale Foundation
  2. American Federation for Aging Research Beeson Award
  3. FNIH Biomarkers Consortium
  4. National Aeronautic and Space Administration [NNG04GK63G]
  5. NIH [5P60-AG13631, R01 AG18887]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Both high body fat and low muscle mass have been associated with physical disability in older adults. However, men and women differ markedly in body composition; men generally have more absolute and relative lean muscle mass and less fat mass than women. It is not known how these anthropometric differences differentially affect physical ability in men and women. Objectives: This study examines differences in anthropometric predictors of physical performance in older women and men. Methods: Participants were 470 older women and men 72.9 (7.9) years of age. Body composition was measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Maximum leg strength and power were measured using a leg press. Muscle quality (MO) was calculated as relative strength (leg press strength per kilogram of leg muscle mass). Gait speed and chair rise were used to assess mobility performance and functional strength. Results: Body mass index (BMI), age, and MQ emerged as predictors (P < 0.05) of functional strength and mobility in men and women somewhat differently. After accounting for age and sample, leg MQ was related to chair rise time and gait speed in men but not women. BMI was related to gait speed in both men and women, but BMI was related to chair rise time only in women. Conclusion: Results implicate the prioritized importance of healthy weight and muscle maintenance in older women and men for maintained physical functioning with aging. (Gend Med. 2012;9:445-456) (c) 2012 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

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

3.9
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