Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences Large Type Edition
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]
Year:  Vol:  Page: 

This Article
Full Text
Full Text (PDF)
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me if a correction is posted
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Download to citation manager
Cited by other online articles
Google Scholar
Articles by Bean, J. F.
Articles by Ferrucci, L.
Articles citing this Article
PubMed Citation
Articles by Bean, J. F.
Articles by Ferrucci, L.
The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 58:M728-M733 (2003)
© 2003 The Gerontological Society of America

A Comparison of Leg Power and Leg Strength Within the InCHIANTI Study: Which Influences Mobility More?

Jonathan F. Bean1,2, Suzanne G. Leveille2, Dan K. Kiely2, Stephania Bandinelli3, Jack M. Guralnik4 and Luigi Ferrucci3,5

1 Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
2 Hebrew Rehabilitation Center for Aged, Boston, Massachusetts.
3 Laboratory of Clinical Epidemiology, INRCA Geriatric Department, Florence, Italy.
4 Epidemiology, Demography and Biometry Program
5 Longitudinal Studies Section, Clinical Research Branch, Gerontology Research Center, National Institute on Aging, Bethesda, Maryland.

Background. In a clinical study evaluating the functioning of mobility-limited elders, muscle power accounted for more of the variation in function than strength did. There was also evidence that the power–function relationship may be described as curvilinear. However, these findings have never been confirmed in a representative population.

Methods. An analysis was conducted using data from the InCHIANTI study, a population-based cohort of 1032 adults living in Italy. To assess the relationships between impairments in power and strength and mobility performance, we created separate multivariate linear and log-transformed regression models as well as separate logistic regression models.

Results. Subjects were age >=65 years, predominately female (54%), with a mean age of 74.2 years, and most had mild–moderate mobility limitations (Short Physical Performance Battery score 10.5 ± 2.1). Though leg extension power and isometric hip extension strength were closely associated, in several separate multivariate linear regression models, leg power consistently explained more of the variance than strength did in several measures of physical performance. Differences were even larger when observed in curvilinear models of power and strength. Using separate multivariate logistic regression models to examine the odds ratios for mobility limitations in persons with low muscle power versus high muscle power, and in persons with low muscle strength versus high muscle strength, we found that both factors influenced risk for mobility limitations, but low power was associated with a 2–3-fold greater likelihood than low strength.

Conclusion. These findings identified muscle power to be a more influential proximal determinant of physical performance than impairments in strength and emphasized muscle power as an important determinant of mobility skills in older adults.

This article has been cited by other articles: (Search Google Scholar for Other Citing Articles)

Home page
JAMAHome page
S. B. Kritchevsky, B. J. Nicklas, M. Visser, E. M. Simonsick, A. B. Newman, T. B. Harris, E. M. Lange, B. W. Penninx, B. H. Goodpaster, S. Satterfield, L. H. Colbert, S. M. Rubin, and M. Pahor
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Insertion/Deletion Genotype, Exercise, and Physical Decline
JAMA, August 10, 2005; 294(6): 691 - 698.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

All GSA journals The Gerontologist
Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences
Copyright © 2003 by The Gerontological Society of America.