Rate of Force Development as a Predictor of Mobility in Community-dwelling Older Adults. Issue 2 (April 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hester, Garrett M.; Ha, Phuong L.; Dalton, Benjamin E.; VanDusseldorp, Trisha A.; Olmos, Alex A.; Stratton, Matthew T.; Bailly, Alyssa R.; Vroman, Tara M.
• Is Part Of: Journal of geriatric physical therapy. Volume 44:Issue 2(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-04
• Subjects: aging -- physical function -- plantar flexors -- strength; Physical therapy for older people -- Periodicals; Older people -- Orientation and mobility -- Periodicals; Older people -- Health and hygiene -- Periodicals; Geriatrics -- Periodicals; 615.820846
• DOI: 10.1519/JPT.0000000000000258
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1539-8412

Abstract

Abstract : Background and Purpose: Rate of force development (RFD) is influential, and possibly more influential than other muscular performance parameters, for mobility in older adults. However, only a few studies have investigated this matter, and this has not been examined for the plantar flexors (PFs). The purpose of this study was to examine the contribution of PF RFD and other common tests of muscular performance to Up-and-Go (UG) performance and walking speed (WS) in older adults. Methods: Twenty-six (19 females) healthy, community-dwelling older adults (73.7 ± 4.9 years) were recruited from a senior citizen center for this observational study. Handgrip strength, UG performance, as well as preferred and maximal WS were obtained. Time taken to complete 5-chair rises and the number of chair rises completed in 30 seconds were recorded. Rate of force development of the PFs was obtained during a rapid, bilateral calf raise performed on a force plate. Hierarchical multiple linear regression was used to identify significant predictors, after adjusting for physical activity level and body mass index, of mobility (ie, UG, preferred and maximal WS). Results and Discussion: No muscular performance variables correlated with preferred WS. Rate of force development (adjusted R 2 = 0.356; P = .008) and handgrip strength (adjusted R 2 = 0.293; P = .026) were the only predictors of maximal WS and accounted for a 21.7% and 16.1% change in R 2, respectively, after accounting for physical activity level and body mass index. Rate of force development was the only predictor of UG performance (adjusted R 2 = 0.212; P = .006) and accounted for a 29.2% change in R 2 after adjustment variables were applied. Conclusions: Compared to common assessments of muscular performance, such as handgrip strength and chair rise performance, PF RFD was a greater predictor of mobility in older adults. These findings, in conjunction with recent reports, indicate that the assessment of RFD likely complements strength testing, thereby enabling a more robust assessment of functional decline in older adults.