A Cross-Sectional Validation Study of Camry EH101 versus JAMAR Plus Handheld Dynamometers in Colorectal Cancer Patients and Their Correlations with Bioelectrical Impedance and Nutritional Status
Background: Reduced muscle strength (dynapenia) and mass (atrophy) are prognostic factors in oncology. Measuring maximal handgrip strength with dynamometers is feasible but limited by the cost of the reference device (JAMAR). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on colorectal cancer outpat...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) |
| Repositorio: | DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:digital.csic.es:10261/383924 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/383924 https://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85197145308 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Camry GLIM criteria JAMAR Smedley Bioelectrical impedance Colorectal cancer Dynamometer Handgrip strength Muscle mass Morphofunctional assessment |
| Sumario: | Background: Reduced muscle strength (dynapenia) and mass (atrophy) are prognostic factors in oncology. Measuring maximal handgrip strength with dynamometers is feasible but limited by the cost of the reference device (JAMAR). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on colorectal cancer outpatients treated with chemotherapy or under active surveillance in our center from September 2022 to July 2023. Accuracy, reliability, and concordance were compared for two handheld dynamometers: the JAMAR Plus (the gold-standard device) and the Camry EH101 (a low-cost index device). A simultaneous nutritional diagnosis with GLIM criteria and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) was carried out. Results: A total of 134 participants were included. The median of maximal strength for the JAMAR Plus had a non-significant difference of 1.4 kg from the Camry EH101. The accuracy and reliability of the devices were high. Bland–Altman analysis showed a 0.8 kg bias and −4.1 to 5.6 kg limits of agreement (LoA); a 0.1 kg bias and −5.3 to 5.4 kg LoA in men; a 1.5 kg bias and −2.2 to 5.3 kg LoA in women. In total, 29.85% of the participants were malnourished. Prevalence of dynapenia increased from 3.67% with the JAMAR Plus to 5.14% with the Camry EH101. Both devices had a moderate and significant correlation with BIA-estimated muscle mass. Conclusions: The Camry EH101 was a cost-effective alternative to JAMAR Plus in our sample. |
|---|