Next Article in Journal
Real-World Evidence of COVID-19 Patients’ Data Quality in the Electronic Health Records
Previous Article in Journal
Cognitive Aid for Anesthetic Preparation in An Emergency Situation: A Simulation-Based Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Healthcare
Volume 9
Issue 12
10.3390/healthcare9121647
healthcare-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Normative Static Grip Strength of Saudi Arabia’s Population and Influences of Numerous Factors on Grip Strength

by
Abdalla Alrashdan
,
Atef M. Ghaleb
* and
Malek Almobarek
Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, Alfaisal University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Healthcare 2021, 9(12), 1647; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9121647
Submission received: 28 September 2021 / Revised: 22 November 2021 / Accepted: 23 November 2021 / Published: 28 November 2021
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Most daily tasks require exerting static grip strength which can be challenging for the elderly as their strength diminishes with age. Moreover, normative static grip strength data are important in ergonomics and clinical settings. The goal of this study is to present the gender, age-specific, hand-specific, and body-mass-index-specific handgrip strength reference of Saudi males and females in order to describe the population’s occupational demand and to compare them with the international standards. The secondary objective is to investigate the effects of gender, age group, hand area, and body mass index on the grip strength. A sample of 297 (146 male and 151 female) volunteers aged between 18 and 70 with different occupations participated in the study. Grip strength data were collected using a Jamar dynamometer with standard test position, protocol, and instructions. The mean maximum voluntary grip strength values for males were 38.71 kg and 22.01 kg, respectively. There was a curvilinear relationship of grip strength to age; significant differences between genders, hand area, and some age groups; and a correlation to hand dimensions depending on the gender.

1. Introduction

Industrial ergonomics is a subfield of ergonomics concerned with the adaptation of job requirements to the physical requirements of the humans who do tasks. To evaluate population physical abilities and their reference values, populations standards are established. The standards are used for the health, protection, comfort, and efficiency of workers. For manual tasks, equipment and product designs that require grip strength are commonly required to avoid hand injuries. Fatigue or eventual injuries may occur when workers are forced to exert forces that exceed their strength [1,2,3,4,5].
Previous studies offer substantial work using grip strength assessment for different diseases and disorders. The studies demonstrate grip strength (1) as an appropriate measure of overall strength in muscle [6]; (2) as a measure of the impact of various neuromuscular and musculoskeletal disorders [7,8,9] and cardiovascular diseases [10]; (3) as an important factor in the diagnosis of sarcopenia [11] and frailty [12]; and (4) as a predictable outcome such as mortality and potential impairment [13]. Grip strength was recommended for regular use as a vital sign and as a screening method for primary and hospital practice [14,15,16].
To assess grip strength deficiencies, normative reference values are investigated for different populations. Many studies provided normative references in different countries. These include the USA [16], the UK [17], Spain [18], Germany [19], Australia [20], Korea [21], Canada [22], Japan [23], Singapore [24], and Taiwan [25].
Many researchers concluded that several factors may affect grip strength [4,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]. Gender is the most important factor affecting grip strength. Studies reported that the male participants displayed a high grip strength relative to their female counterparts due to the disparity in body structure such as a small muscle mass and high fat mass in females [33,34]. Studies have also shown that grip strength decreases as a person ages [35,36], and there is a close correlation between grip strength and a person’s nutritional status [37,38]. In addition, nutritional status also contributes to certain body mass levels, which were in turn determined to be directly linked to grip strength [39]. Mohan et al. [40] reported that handgrip strength for the dominant hand can be predicted by using hand length and forearm circumference. Fraser et al. [41] and Sirajudeen et al. [42] reported that grip strength and forearm girth have a significant correlation. Incel et al. [43] showed that the strength of the handgrip was higher in groups that dominate the right hand than the left hand. Nevertheless, Reikeras [44] and Roberts et al. [45] have shown that the dominant and non-dominant hand has no significant grip strength difference. Studies show that grip strength at standing posture was more than grip strength at sitting and the supine because of changes in the length of the muscle [46,47,48]. Su et al. [46] argued that a shoulder with 180-degree flexion had a better grip than zero-degree flexion. Swanson et al. [47] showed that the participant’s grip strength was higher in the unsupported arm when compared with the supported arm. Watson and Ring [48] argued that decreasing grip strength is correlated with psychological factors such as depression. Auyeung et al.’s [49] and Choudhary et al.’s [50] studies found connections between the strength of the handgrip and mental health and cognition.
Many studies showed that the strength of the grip differs based on nationality and ethnicity [4,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58]. Consequently, this study aims to predict the gripping strength of the Saudi population and the factors that affect it. The study investigates the effects of gender, age, body mass index, and hand area on grip strength for the Saudi population. The current study differs from previous research based on its study objective, participants, region, and scope.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

The participants were recruited from Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia. It is the highest populated city and the main financial and government hub of the country. The city is assumed to represent the country’s demographic as it is a mixture of Saudis who moved from different regions to Riyadh seeking job opportunities.
It was hard to recruit participants on a voluntary basis. The participants were solicited by visiting different work facilities such as hospitals, banks, grocery stores, universities, restaurants, households, etc. The randomness of the sample was sought as much as possible. However, some subjects, especially older participants, were selected to complete the data set of all possible categories under study. Inclusion criteria included participants who have not experienced any neuromuscular disease or injury and had no recent or ongoing hand or upper-limb injury. Prior to the study, ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Review Board at Alfaisal University (IRB-20037).
The data were collected from both genders between 18 and 70 years old. The sample of each gender is divided into 5 different age groups (18–29, 30–39, 40–49,50–59, and 60–70). A total of 296 subjects participated in the study, which include 146 females and 150 male volunteers. The sample size was determined based on the ISO general standards [59] for establishing anthropometric databases. The following formula was provided to calculate the required sample size that achieve a 95% confidence interval for the 5th and the 95th percentile:
n ≥ ( 3.006 × C V α ) 2   and   C V   is   estimated   by   S X ¯
where n is the sample size, CV is the coefficient of variation, α is the percentage of the desired relative accuracy, and X ¯ and S are the sample average and standard deviation of the gripping strength, respectively. The required sample size for male and female subjects was determined based on a pilot run of 50 samples of each gender, and the X ¯ and S are calculated for each gender. Using a relative accuracy α = 0.05, the sample size for the males and females were found to be 121 and 67, respectively. The sample size for the study in both genders is greater than the required sample size recommended by ISO standards. The descriptive statistics of the participant data are shown in Table 1 and Table 2.
None of them had self-reported musculoskeletal complaints or problems. All participants were instructed to have a full night’s sleep and to avoid cigarettes and caffeine in the 6 h preceding the tests. Before testing, all participants provided written consent and the protocol and procedures were explained verbally to all participants.

2.2. Equipment

The Jamar handgrip dynamometer was used to measure the grip strength with different grip spans for which to accommodate different subjects to enable them to produce their maximal grip strength. The general practice has been the use of the second set of the dynamometer for all or second setting (for females) and third settings (for males). ROSSCRAFT anthropometric tapes and calipers were used for measuring height hand length and width. A digital scale was used to collect the subject’s weight.

2.3. Experimental Setup and Procedures

The objectives of the study were shared with the subjects before collecting the data with a full description of the test procedure. Subjects were asked to wear light clothes with bare feet and heads before the scheduled visit to take the measurements. The stature was measured using portable anthropometry from the floor to the head vertex while the subject is standing with a straight erect posture. The weights are recorded from the subjects while standing on the scale with minimum movements and hands alongside the body. The hand length and width are measured using sliding anthropometry, as shown in Figure 1.
Before beginning the data collection, several days were spent to standardize the measurement techniques to reduce data collection variability to a minimum. All subjects participated in a pilot study to familiarize themselves with the gripping strength device, preferred gripping span, and testing procedure. An average temperature of 23.8 °C, relative humidity of 30.6 percent, and continuous lighting were present in the laboratory setting. While the activities were taking place, the experimental site was guaranteed to have no noises or heavy odors. Before the actual test, the participants performed several trial tests at five different grip span settings on the dynamometer to determine their ‘preferred grip span’, for which they felt comfortable and could produce their maximal grip strength. The participants were once again permitted to try the spans one above and one below the preferred span after the initial determination of the preferred span to ensure it that was the one the participant preferred. The Grip strength values were recorded in the morning (9 a.m.–12 p.m.) according to the protocol recommended by the American Society of Hand Therapists [4,60]. This protocol is described as “the sitting position for this recording was sitting in a straight-backed chair with the feet flat on the floor, the shoulder adducted and neutrally rotated, elbow flexed at 90 Degree, and forearm and wrist in a neutral position” as shown in Figure 2.
For all measurements, the arm was free without using any support for it. In order to preserve the normal forearm and wrist positions, the dynamometer has been presented vertically and in alignment with the forearm and the experimenter helped to support the weight of the dynamometer as shown in [4,61]. Collecting the measurement of grip strength follows the protocol suggested by Caldwell et al. (1974) [62]. All the instructions given to the participants were standardized to eliminate subjects’ personal differences. When the participant was ready, he or she was instructed to “increase to maximum exertion (without jerk) in about one second and maintain this effort during a four-second count.
The grip strength measurements were taken 3 times and there was a 5 min time to rest between each reading to provide the subject with sufficient time to recover his strength. The grip strength for a particular subject is approved when the grip strength was within 10 percent for the 3 readings; otherwise, a fourth reading was taken.

2.4. Data Analysis

The analysis of the collected data was conducted using IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 23.0. (IBM Corp. Armonk, NY, USA) An analysis of variance (ANOVA with assumptions of normality, independence, and homoscedasticity) was used to investigate the effects of independent factors on grip strength. The variables include gender, age group, hand area, and body mass index. There are two levels of gender (males and females), five levels of age factor (18–29, 30–39, 40–49, 50–59, 60–70 years), three-hand area factor levels (small, medium, and large), and the area was measured by multiplying the hand length (L) by the width (W). The length is measured from the distal wrist crease to the middle of the tipping point of the middle figure. The width is measured from the metacarpal radiale to the metacarpal ulnare, and three levels for the body mass index (underweight, normal, and overweight) were considered. The body mass index stratification was underweight (BMI < 18.5), normal (18.5 ≤ BMI < 25), and overweight (BMI ≥ 25) [63]. The levels of the area factor were found using the K-means clustering algorithm for both genders: for males, small (Area < 146), medium (146 ≤ Area < 176), and large (Area ≥ 176) and, for females, small (Area < 101), medium (101 < Area ≤ 126), and large (Area ≥ 126). The Shapiro–Wilk test was implemented to test data normality [64]. The statistical significance was set at a confidence level of 95%. Accordingly, to investigate the relationship between Weight, Height, BMI, and Hand Area, Pearson Correlation Test with magnitudes of the associations (r = ±0.10–±0.29: small; r = ±0.30–±0.49: moderate; r = ±0.50–±1.0: strong) was conducted; Table 3 shows the Pearson’s correlation coefficients.

3. Results

3.1. Effect of the Gender

The results show that gender has a significant effect on grip strength (F = 778.518, p < 0.001). The male grip strength was significantly higher (mean (SD) = 38.71 (6.08)) when compared with female grip strength (mean (SD) = 22.01 (4.03)), as shown in Figure 3.

3.2. Effect of the Age Group

3.2.1. For Male

The statistical analysis showed that there is a significant effect for the age group on the grip strength (F = 7.36, p < 0.001). The post hoc analysis shows that the (60–70) age group is the only group significantly weaker than (18–29), (30–39), (40–49), and (50–59) age groups. Additionally, the age group of (30–39) is the strongest followed by (18–29) then (40–49), as shown in Figure 4, but there were no significant differences between the (18–29), (30–39), (40–49), and (50–59) age groups. Table 4 shows the mean and standard deviation of grip strength for age groups of males.

3.2.2. For Female

The statistical analysis showed that there is a significant effect for the age group on the grip strength (F = 5.87, p < 0.0001). The post hoc test shows that (60–70) and (50–59) age groups are significantly weaker than the (18–29) and (30–39) age groups. In addition, the (50–59) age group was significantly lower than the (40–49) age group. In addition, the age group of (18–29) is the strongest followed by (30–39), then (40–49), as shown in Figure 5, but there were no significant differences between the (18–29), (30–39), and (40–49) age groups and between the (50–59) and (60–70) age groups. Table 5 shows the mean and standard deviation of grip strength for age groups of females.

3.3. Effect of the Hand Area

3.3.1. For Male

The hand area had significantly affected the grip strength F = 3.56, p < 0.031. The statistical analysis shows that the grip strength for large hand areas was significantly higher (mean (SD) = 40.47 (4.85)) than for medium hand area (mean (SD) = 38.08 (6.01)) and small hand areas (mean (SD) = 37.41 (7.02)). However, there were no significant differences between grip strength for medium hand areas and small hand areas.

3.3.2. For Female

For female data, the statistical analysis showed that no significant effect for hand area on grip strength. Although the medium hand area is the strongest followed by large hand area then small hand area.

3.4. Effect of the Body Mass Index

The results show that the body mass index has no significant effect on the grip strength for males and females.

3.5. A Comparison of Average Grip Strength in Saudi Arabia with Other Countries

A comparison of Saudi Arabia’s average grip strength with different countries’ populations according to age groups from prior studies is shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7. As can be seen, there is no significant difference in the average grip strength between Saudi Arabian adults and the Taiwanese population. On the contrary, the grip strength in other societies, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Turkey, Iran, Switzerland, Australia, and a common database of Western countries, is significantly different in all age groups, as the population of these countries has a higher average grip strength in both sexes than the Saudi population.

4. Discussion

The primary purpose of this research was to study the influence of several factors such as gender, age, hand area, and BMI on the grip strength in the Saudi Arabian population. The hypotheses of this study stated that gender, age, hand area, and BMI have a significant effect on grip strength.
In general, the findings of this research are in agreement with a study performed in some other populations. Grip strength has been found to be related to gender, age group, hand area, and body mass index.

4.1. Gender Effect

Overall, the grip strength of males has been shown to be considerably higher than that of females. The present research for the population of Saudi Arabia has confirmed this fact again through several earlier studies [4,65]. The strength of muscles is a function of the size of the associated muscles. Since males normally have larger arm muscles and are more active than females in activities involving strength, their mean grip strength is estimated to be higher than females [4].

4.2. Age Group Effect

In males, there was no inverse or direct relationship between grip strength and age group, while in females, the relationship is inverse, as the age increases, the grip strength decreases. The strength of the male grip increases and peaks somewhere between 30 and 39 years of age and gradually decreases until about 49 years of age and then begins to decrease significantly. This relationship is similar to what has been reported in previous studies [4,56]. However, the grip strength of females tends to decrease as they get older. It is possible that the difference in the length of time required to maintain grip strength between men and women may be partially due to genetics and partly due to resistance to age-related muscle loss because people maintain arm muscle mass by engaging in physical activities for a longer period of time, and thus fighting age-related muscle loss for a longer period of time [4]. Grip strength peaks during the third and fourth decades and declines thereafter as reported by many researchers [4,25,56,57]. The results for males in this study are completely consistent with those studies. For example, Eksioglu 2016 [4] reported that male grip strength peaks within the 30–39 year age group and regularly decrease thereafter. In contrast, female grip strength peaks within the 18–29-year age group and then decrease as the age group increase and this finding is similar to our findings.

4.3. Hand Area Effect

The hand area had significantly affected the grip strength for males but did not affect the grip strength for females. It was hard to compare our results regarding hand area since there was no existence of a similar study available in the literature. However, ultrasound can be used to determine the cross-sectional area of certain hand muscles. As a result, this technique may be beneficial for monitoring muscle reinnervation in patients with peripheral nerve damage, complementing strength dynamometers [66].
In additional hands, exert gripping force on the object to gain control and prevent it from falling. The total force is found by integrating the shear force acting on the logididunal contact area between the hand surface and the gripped object. The higher the contact area the bigger the gripping force. It was found that the contact area is correlated with hand area [34].
Finally, the total gripping force is the sum of all individual forces acting by hand anatomical components. Considering the total area will include the anatomical parts of the hand.

4.4. BMI Effect

When body mass index was classified into underweight, normal, and overweight, we found that there was no correlation between body mass index with grip strength for males or females. These results are similar to those results found by many researchers [67,68,69]. In contrast, Massy-Westropp et al. 2011 [20] concluded that there was a very small positive correlation between body mass index and grip strength in the youngest and oldest age groups in the sample. They also noted that body mass index was negatively correlated with grip strength in the (40–49), (50–59), and (60–65, 67–70) age groups. In additional, Dhananjaya et al. 2017 [70] noted a significant negative correlation between body mass index and grip strength.

4.5. Grip Strength in Different Populations

As a matter of fact, handgrip strength comparisons between regions may shed light on historical regional variances in genetic variables, dietary inadequacies, and/or sociocultural environments [71]. When the grip strength of Saudi adults (of any gender) was compared to the grip strength of Taiwan adults, no significant differences were found. However, grip strength in other societies, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Turkey, Iran, Switzerland, Australia, and a common database of Western countries, differ significantly in all age groups, as shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6. The population of these countries has a higher average grip strength in both sexes than the Saudi population. According to Kamarul et al. and Xiao et al., there is a considerable difference in grip strength between Malaysian adults and Chinese adults with Western dominance [55,72]. The likelihood is that the variations in grip strength normative data values are due in large part to the disparity in anthropometric parameters. Physical characteristics such as height and weight depend on the type of race [73]. As a result, the vast disparity in grip strength between Saudi and Taiwanese populations and Western, Turkish, and Iranian [74] populations is due to racial differences. The influence of race can be so strong that it can overshadow the influence of other important factors such as diet, socioeconomic status, and cultural group. The significance of the race impact was demonstrated in a study conducted by Anjum et al., in which the geographical and socio-economic variables of the comparable populations were examined. It was discovered that British individuals had a statistically significant dominance in all grip strengths when compared to Asian people among the residents of West Yorkshire, England, which had a predominantly British population and a large proportion of Asian people [75].
As gripping strength has been linked to anthropometric and socioeconomic factors of a particular society, Saudi Arabia is no different from other developing countries when compared with industrialized countries concerning body size and socioeconomic factors. A study by Alrashdan et al. [76] has shown that the weight and stature of US females and some Western countries are significantly higher than Saudi females. At the socioeconomic level, the Saudi health-based socioeconomic indices are lower compared to the US and Western countries due to the lack of education and healthcare services provided to rural communities living far from educational institutions or healthcare facilities. These factors might explain the smaller gripping strength of the Saudi population compared to Western countries, as well as the nature of the work performed by the Saudi population, as most of them work in office work, which does not require physical work. In addition, fitness here is less than in other countries, and obesity in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is greater than that in other countries; all of these factors helped to make the grip strength of the Saudis less.

5. Limitations

The primary limitation of our study is that, while the analysis takes into account characteristics such as age, gender, hand area, and body mass index, it does not take into consideration anthropometric factors (for example, wrist circumference), level of physical activity of the participants, and socioeconomic status that have been shown to influence grip strength in previous research. The study also has another limitation in that it only gives data for dominant hands rather than data for both dominant and non-dominant hands. A third limitation of our study is that it was only undertaken in one city, which is the capital, although the capital usually contains residents representing all parts of the country due to the availability of services and job opportunities in the capital.

6. Conclusions

In this study, the hand-grip strength norms of healthy adult Saudi citizens aged 18 to 70 were established. The data may serve as reference values in designing for grip strength (tasks, equipment, and consumer products). The availability of such data makes it possible to create biomechanical models and develop ergonomics evaluation tools. Additionally, the results of this research may also be helpful for treating clients and for preparing them for a job return.
These findings show how grip strength for Saudi Arabia’s population differs from those of other populations. This study provides new information on the various factors that influence grip strength. An overwhelming majority of these variables have already been studied in other populations. Despite this, the results for the study population demonstrate the impact of these factors on grip strength.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.A.; methodology, A.A., A.M.G., and M.A.; software, A.A. and A.M.G.; validation, A.M.G. and M.A.; formal analysis, A.A. and A.M.G.; investigation, A.A., A.M.G., and M.A.; resources, A.A. and M.A.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M.G.; writing—review and editing, A.A. and M.A.; visualization, M.A.; supervision, A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors would like to thank office of research and graduate studies at Alfaisal University for funding and supporting this research.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Alfaisal University (IRB-20037).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

All data are available in this research.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank office of research and graduate studies at Alfaisal University.

Conflicts of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

  1. Eksioglu, M. Relative optimum grip span as a function of hand anthropometry. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2004, 34, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Eksioglu, M. Optimal work–rest cycles for an isometric intermittent gripping task as a function of force, posture and grip span. Ergonomics 2006, 49, 180–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ekşioğlu, M. Endurance time of grip-force as a function of grip-span and arm posture. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2011, 41, 401–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ekşioğlu, M. Normative static grip strength of population of Turkey, effects of various factors and a comparison with international norms. Appl. Ergon. 2016, 52, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Potvin, J.R. Predicting maximum acceptable efforts for repetitive tasks: An equation based on duty cycle. Hum. Factors 2012, 54, 175–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bohannon, R.W. Hand-grip dynamometry predicts future outcomes in aging adults. J. Geriatr. Phys. Ther. 2008, 31, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bautista-Aguirre, F.; Oliva, P.V.; Heredia-Rizo, A.M.; Boscá-Gandía, J.J.; Ricard, F.; Rodriguez-Blanco, C. Effect of cervical vs. thoracic spinal manipulation on peripheral neural features and grip strength in subjects with chronic mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trial. Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 2017, 53, 333–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Białas, A.; Synder, M.; Dyhdalewicz, A.; Walenczak, K. Analysis of Upper Limb Movement Range and Global Grip Strength After Surgical Treatment of AO Type C Distal Radius Fractures Using LCP Plates and K-wires. Ortop. Traumatol. Rehabil. 2016, 18, 223–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  9. Boissy, P.; Bourbonnais, D.; Carlotti, M.M.; Gravel, D.; Arsenault, B.A. Maximal grip force in chronic stroke subjects and its relationship to global upper extremity function. Clin. Rehabil. 1999, 13, 354–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Shah, S.; Nahar, P.; Vaidya, S.; Salvi, S. Upper limb muscle strength & endurance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Indian J. Med. Res. 2013, 138, 492. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  11. Cruz-Jentoft, A.J.; Baeyens, J.P.; Bauer, J.M.; Boirie, Y.; Cederholm, T.; Landi, F.; Martin, F.C.; Michel, J.-P.; Rolland, Y.; Schneider, S.M.; et al. Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: Report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. Age Ageing 2010, 39, 412–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Fried, L.P.; Tangen, C.M.; Walston, J.; Newman, A.B.; Hirsch, C.; Gottdiener, J.; McBurnie, M.A. Frailty in older adults: Evidence for a phenotype. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2001, 56, M146–M157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Bohannon, R.W. Is it legitimate to characterize muscle strength using a limited number of measures? J. Strength Cond. Res. 2008, 22, 166–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Lee, L.; Patel, T.; Costa, A.; Bryce, E.; Hillier, L.M.; Slonim, K.; Molnar, F. Screening for frailty in primary care: Accuracy of gait speed and hand-grip strength. Can. Fam. Physician 2017, 63, e51–e57. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  15. Ibrahim, K.; May, C.; Patel, H.P.; Baxter, M.; Sayer, A.A.; Roberts, H.C. A feasibility study of implementing grip strength measurement into routine hospital practice (GRImP): Study protocol. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2016, 2, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Wang, Y.-C.; Bohannon, R.W.; 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, 685–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Dodds, R.M.; Syddall, H.E.; Cooper, R.; Benzeval, M.; Deary, I.J.; Dennison, E.M.; Der, G.; Gale, C.R.; Inskip, H.M.; Jagger, C.; et al. Grip strength across the life course: Normative data from twelve british studies. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e113637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Luna-Heredia, E.; Martín-Peña, G.; Ruiz-Galiana, J. Handgrip dynamometry in healthy adults. Clin. Nutr. 2005, 24, 250–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Günther, C.M.; Bürger, A.; Rickert, M.; Schulz, C.U. Key Pinch in Healthy Adults: Normative Values. J. Hand Surg. Eur. 2008, 33, 144–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Massy-Westropp, N.M.; Gill, T.K.; Taylor, A.W.; Bohannon, R.W.; Hill, C.L. Hand Grip Strength: Age and gender stratified normative data in a population-based study. BMC Res. Notes 2011, 4, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Shim, J.H.; Roh, S.Y.; Kim, J.S.; Lee, D.C.; Ki, S.H.; Yang, J.W.; Jeon, M.K.; Lee, S.M. Normative measurements of grip and pinch strengths of 21st century korean population. Arch. Plast. Surg. 2013, 40, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Wong, S.L. Grip strength reference values for Canadians aged 6 to 79: Canadian Health Measures Survey, 2007 to 2013. Health Rep. 2016, 27, 3–10. [Google Scholar]
  23. Seino, S.; Shinkai, S.; Fujiwara, Y.; Obuchi, S.; Yoshida, H.; Hirano, H.; Kim, H.K.; Ishizaki, T.; Takahashi, R.; on behalf of the TMIG-LISA Research Group. Reference values and age and sex differences in physical performance measures for community-dwelling older japanese: A pooled analysis of six cohort studies. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e99487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Jais, I.S.M.; Nadkarni, N.V.; Ng, Y.-S.; Seow, D.C.C.; Wong, T.H. Investigating the functional grip strength of elderly fallers in Singapore. Proc. Singap. Health 2019, 28, 252–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wu, S.-W.; Wu, S.-F.; Liang, H.-W.; Wu, Z.-T.; Huang, S. Measuring factors affecting grip strength in a Taiwan Chinese population and a comparison with consolidated norms. Appl. Ergon. 2009, 40, 811–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kumar, A.J.S.; Parmar, V.; Ahmed, S.; Kar, S.; Harper, W.M. A study of grip endurance and strengh in different elbow positions. J. Orthop. Traumatol. 2008, 9, 209–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Liao, K.-H. Optimal handle grip span for maximum hand grip strength and accurate grip control strength exertion according to individual hand size. J. Osteoporos. Phys. Act. 2016, 4, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Jais, I.S.M.; Chan, K.L.; Loke, M.K.A.; Rahim, S.A.; Tay, S.C. Normative data on functional grip strength of elderly in Singapore. J. Hand Ther. 2018, 31, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Abaraogu, U.O.; Ezema, C.I.; Ofodile, U.N.; Igwe, S.E. Association of grip strength with anthropometric measures: Height, forearm diameter, and middle finger length in young adults. Pol. Ann. Med. 2017, 24, 153–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yorke, A.M.; Curtis, A.B.; Shoemaker, M.; Vangsnes, E. The impact of multimorbidity on grip strength in adults age 50 and older: Data from the health and retirement survey (HRS). Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2017, 72, 164–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bhuanantanondh, P.; Nanta, P.; Mekhora, K. Determining sincerity of effort based on grip strength test in three wrist positions. Saf. Health Work. 2017, 9, 59–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ramadan, M.Z. The effects of industrial protective gloves and hand skin temperatures on hand grip strength and discomfort rating. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Sasaki, H.; Kasagi, F.; Yamada, M.; Fujita, S. Grip strength predicts cause-specific mortality in middle-aged and elderly persons. Am. J. Med. 2007, 120, 337–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Seo, N.J.; Armstrong, T.J. Investigation of Grip Force, Normal Force, Contact Area, Hand Size, and Handle Size for Cylindrical Handles. Hum. Factors: J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 2008, 50, 734–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Hong, G.-R.S.; Cho, S.-H.; Tak, Y. Falls among Koreans 45 years of age and older: Incidence and risk factors. J. Adv. Nurs. 2010, 66, 2014–2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Martin, J.; Ramsay, J.; Hughes, C.; Peters, D.; Edwards, M. Age and grip strength predict hand dexterity in adults. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0117598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. Kaur, M. Age-related changes in hand grip strength among rural and urban Haryanvi Jat females. HOMO 2009, 60, 441–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Tsunawake, N.; Tahara, Y.; Moji, K.; Muraki, S.; Minowa, K.; Yukawa, K. Body composition and physical fitness of female volleyball and basketball players of the japan inter-high school championship teams. J. Physiol. Anthr. Appl. Hum. Sci. 2003, 22, 195–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Cooper, R.; Kuh, D.; Cooper, C.; Gale, C.R.; Lawlor, D.A.; Matthews, F.; Hardy, R.; the FALCon and HALCyon Study Teams. Objective measures of physical capability and subsequent health: A systematic review. Age Ageing 2010, 40, 14–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Mohan, V.; Shamsaimon, N.S.; Japri, M.I.; Yasin, N.E.; Henry, L.J.; Othman, I.R. Fore arm circumference and hand length predicts maximal hand grip strength among Malaysian population. Middle East J. Sci. Res. 2014, 21, 634–639. [Google Scholar]
  41. Fraser, A.; Vallow, J.; Preston, A.; Cooper, R.G. Predicting ’normal’ grip strength for rheumatoid arthritis patients. Rheumatol. (Oxf. Engl.) 1999, 38, 521–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Sirajudeen, M.S.; Shah, U.; Pillai, P.; Mohasin, N.; Shantaram, M. Correlation between grip strength and physical factors in men. Int. J. Health Rehabilitation Sci. 2012, 1, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Incel, N.A.; Ceceli, E.; Durukan, P.B.; Erdem, H.R.; Yorgancioglu, Z.R. Grip strength: Effect of hand dominance. Singap. Med. J. 2002, 43, 234–237. [Google Scholar]
  44. Reikerås, O. Bilateral differences of normal hand strength. Arch. Orthop. Trauma Surg. 1983, 101, 223–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Roberts, H.C.; Denison, H.J.; Martin, H.J.; Patel, H.P.; Syddall, H.; Cooper, C.; Sayer, A.A. A review of the measurement of grip strength in clinical and epidemiological studies: Towards a standardised approach. Age Ageing 2011, 40, 423–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Su, C.-Y.; Lin, J.-H.; Chien, T.-H.; Cheng, K.-F.; Sung, Y.-T. Grip strength in different positions of elbow and shoulder. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 1994, 75, 812–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Swanson, S.; Alfred, B.; Ivan, B.M.; Groot, D. The strength of hand. J. Assoc. Child. Prosthet.-Orthotic Clin. 1974, 13, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  48. Watson, J.; Ring, D. Influence of psychological factors on grip strength. J. Hand Surg. 2008, 33, 1791–1795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Auyeung, T.W.; Lee, J.S.W.; Kwok, T.; Woo, J. Physical frailty predicts future cognitive decline—a four-year prospective study in 2737 cognitively normal older adults. J. Nutr. Health Aging 2011, 15, 690–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Choudhary, A.K.; Jiwane, R.; Alam, T.; Kishanrao, S.S. Grip strength and impact on cognitive function in healthy kitchen workers. Achiev. Life Sci. 2016, 10, 168–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Chapanis, A. Ethnic variables in human factors engineering. Appl. Ergon. 1975, 239, 19–23. [Google Scholar]
  52. Desrosiers, J.; Bravo, G.; Hébert, R.; Dutil, É. Normative Data for Grip Strength of Elderly Men and Women. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 1995, 49, 637–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Butler, M. Grip strength: A comparative study. N. Z. J. Occup. Ther. 1997, 48, 5–12. [Google Scholar]
  54. Kothiyal, K.; Tettey, S. Anthropometric data of elderly people in Australia. Appl. Ergon. 2000, 31, 329–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kamarul, T.; Ahmad, T.S.; Loh, W.Y.C. Hand grip strength in the adult Malaysian population. J. Orthop. Surg. 2006, 14, 172–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Andersen-Ranberg, K.; Petersen, I.; Frederiksen, H.; MacKenbach, J.P.; Christensen, K. Cross-national differences in grip strength among 50+ year-old Europeans: Results from the SHARE study. Eur. J. Ageing 2009, 6, 227–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Werle, S.; Goldhahn, J.; Drerup, S.; Simmen, B.R.; Sprott, H.; Herren, D.B. Age-and gender-specific normative data of grip and pinch strength in a healthy adult Swiss population. J. Hand Surg. 2009, 34, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Araujo, A.B.; Chiu, G.R.; Kupelian, V.; Hall, S.A.; Williams, R.E.; Clark, R.V.; McKinlay, J.B. Lean mass, muscle strength, and physical function in a diverse population of men: A population-based cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 2010, 10, 508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  59. International Standards Organisation. 15535 General Requirements for Establishing Anthropometric Databases. 2006. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/44067.html (accessed on 27 November 2021).
  60. Fess, E.E. Grip Strength, 2nd ed.; American Society of Hand Therapists: Chicago, IL, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  61. Mathiowetz, V. Grip and Pinch Strength Measurements. In Muscle Strength Testing: Instrumented and Non-Instrumented Systems; Amundsen, L.R., Ed.; Churchill Livingstone: New York, NY, USA, 1990; pp. 163–177. [Google Scholar]
  62. Caldwell, L.S.; Chaffin, D.B.; Dukes-Dobos, F.N.; Kroemer, K.H.E.; Laubach, L.L.; Snook, S.H.; Wasserman, D.E. A proposed standard procedure for static muscle strength testing. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 1974, 35, 201–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Organización Mundial de la Salud. WHO Global Database on Body Mass Index. 2011. Available online: apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp (accessed on 27 November 2021).
  64. Shapiro, S.S.; Wilk, M.B. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 1965, 52, 591–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Bohannon, R.W.; Peolsson, A.; Massy-Westropp, N.; Desrosiers, J.; Bear-Lehman, J. Reference values for adult grip strength measured with a Jamar dynamometer: A descriptive meta-analysis. Physiotherapy 2006, 92, 11–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Mohseny, B.; Nijhuis, T.H.; Hundepool, C.A.; Janssen, W.G.; Selles, R.W.; Coert, J.H. Ultrasonographic quantification of intrinsic hand muscle cross-sectional area; reliability and validity for predicting muscle strength. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2015, 96, 845–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Apovian, C.M.; Frey, C.M.; Wood, G.C.; Rogers, J.Z.; Still, C.D.; Jensen, G.L. Body mass index and physical function in older women. Obes. Res. 2002, 10, 740–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Vaz, M.; Hunsberger, S.; Diffey, B. Prediction equations for handgrip strength in healthy Indian male and female subjects encompassing a wide age range. Ann. Hum. Biol. 2002, 29, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Koley, S.; Kaur, N.; Sandhu, J. A study on hand grip strength in female labourers of Jalandhar, Punjab, India. J. LIFE Sci. 2009, 1, 57–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Dhananjaya, J.R.; Veena, H.C.; Mamatha, B.S.; Sudarshan, C.R. Comparative study of body mass index, hand grip strength, and handgrip endurance in healthy individuals. Natl. J. Physiol. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2017, 7, 594. [Google Scholar]
  71. Jeune, B.; Skytthe, A.; Cournil, A.; Greco, V.; Gampe, J.; Berardelli, M.; Andersen-Ranberg, K.; Passarino, G.; De Benedictis, G.; Robine, J.-M. Handgrip strength among nonagenarians and centenarians in three european regions. J. Gerontol. Ser. A: Boil. Sci. Med. Sci. 2006, 61, 707–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  72. Xiao, G.; Lei, L.; Dempsey, P.; Lu, B.; Liang, Y. Isometric muscle strength and anthropometric characteristics of a Chinese sample. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2005, 35, 674–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Adedoyin, R.A.; Ogundapo, F.A.; Mbada, C.E.; Adekanla, B.A.; Johnson, O.E.; Onigbinde, T.A.; Emechete, A.A. Reference values for handgrip strength among healthy adults in nigeria. Hong Kong Physiother. J. 2009, 27, 21–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Mohammadian, M.; Choobineh, A.; Haghdoost, A.; Hasheminejad, N. Normative data of grip and pinch strengths in healthy adults of iranian population. Iran. J. Public Health 2014, 43, 1113–1122. [Google Scholar]
  75. Anjum, S.N.; Choudary, P.; Dimri, R.; Ankarath, S. Comparative evaluation of grip and pinch strength in an Asian and European population. Hand Ther. 2012, 17, 11–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Alrashdan, A.; Alsudairi, L.; Alqaddoumi, A. Anthropometry of Saudi Arabian female college students. In Proceedings of the 2014 Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, Montreal, QC, Canada, 31 May–3 June 2014; pp. 4075–4083. [Google Scholar]
Healthcare 09 01647 g001 550
Figure 1. Hand area.
Figure 1. Hand area.
Healthcare 09 01647 g001
Healthcare 09 01647 g002 550
Figure 2. Illustration of the position for the measurement of Grip Strength.
Figure 2. Illustration of the position for the measurement of Grip Strength.
Healthcare 09 01647 g002
Healthcare 09 01647 g003 550
Figure 3. Effect of gender on the grip strength (* means there is a significant difference between levels).
Figure 3. Effect of gender on the grip strength (* means there is a significant difference between levels).
Healthcare 09 01647 g003
Healthcare 09 01647 g004 550
Figure 4. Effect of the age group on the grip strength of the male (* means there is a significant difference between levels).
Figure 4. Effect of the age group on the grip strength of the male (* means there is a significant difference between levels).
Healthcare 09 01647 g004
Healthcare 09 01647 g005 550
Figure 5. Effect of the age group on the grip strength of females (* means there is a significant difference between levels).
Figure 5. Effect of the age group on the grip strength of females (* means there is a significant difference between levels).
Healthcare 09 01647 g005
Healthcare 09 01647 g006 550
Figure 6. Male, regional reports of mean grip strength by age groups.
Figure 6. Male, regional reports of mean grip strength by age groups.
Healthcare 09 01647 g006
Healthcare 09 01647 g007 550
Figure 7. Female, regional reports of mean grip strength by age groups.
Figure 7. Female, regional reports of mean grip strength by age groups.
Healthcare 09 01647 g007
Table
Table 1. Describes participant information.
Table 1. Describes participant information.
Body MeasurementMale (n = 146)Female (n = 150)
Mean ± SDMean ± SD
Age (year)38.5 ± 12.638.7 ± 12.9
Weight (kg)85.5 ± 15.566.1 ± 11.8
Hight (cm)175.7 ± 6.3161.8 ± 5.4
BMI (kg/m2)27.7 ± 4.725.2 ± 4.5
Hand length (cm)18.4 ± 1.315.9 ± 1.4
Hand width (cm)8.8 ± 1.27.3 ± 0.9
Hand area (cm2)163.6 ± 27.5116.8 ± 20.3
Table
Table 2. Describes participant information.
Table 2. Describes participant information.
Age GroupNo. of ParticipantsHeight (cm)Weight (kg)BMI (kg/m2)Hand Area (cm2)
MaleFemaleMaleFemaleMaleFemaleMaleFemaleMaleFemale
18–293030175.6159.7581.156.326.322.04158.3141.5
30–393030177.316484.561.326.927.2162106.8
40–493030177163.585.573.227.327.5165.2104.9
50–593030177.8161.591.181.528.831.3167126
60–703026171160.2585.258.229.117.96165.4104.2
Table
Table 3. The correlation between weight, height, BMI, and hand area.
Table 3. The correlation between weight, height, BMI, and hand area.
FactorsWeight (kg)Height (cm)BMI (kg/m2)
MaleFemaleMaleFemaleMaleFemale
Height0.298 **0.168
BMI0.901 **0.933 **−0.143−0.192
Hand area0.114−0.1030.091−0.0590.069−0.084
** Correlation is significant.
Table
Table 4. Summary of males’ grip strength results.
Table 4. Summary of males’ grip strength results.
Age GroupGrip Strength (kg Force)
MeanStd. Deviation
18–2940.095.758
30–3940.425.930
40–4938.295.789
50–5937.955.455
60–7030.22.251
Table
Table 5. Summary of females’ grip strength results.
Table 5. Summary of females’ grip strength results.
Age GroupGrip Strength (kg Force)
MeanSD
18–2923.294.255
30–3923.053.634
40–4922.084.425
50–5919.532.488
60–70192.309
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Alrashdan, A.; Ghaleb, A.M.; Almobarek, M. Normative Static Grip Strength of Saudi Arabia’s Population and Influences of Numerous Factors on Grip Strength. Healthcare 2021, 9, 1647. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9121647

AMA Style

Alrashdan A, Ghaleb AM, Almobarek M. Normative Static Grip Strength of Saudi Arabia’s Population and Influences of Numerous Factors on Grip Strength. Healthcare. 2021; 9(12):1647. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9121647

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alrashdan, Abdalla, Atef M. Ghaleb, and Malek Almobarek. 2021. "Normative Static Grip Strength of Saudi Arabia’s Population and Influences of Numerous Factors on Grip Strength" Healthcare 9, no. 12: 1647. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9121647

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop