Trial reportThe journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences2023
Gripwise Versus Jamar: The Challenge of a New Dynamometer Assessing Handgrip Strength.
Trial report in The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity, reliability, and diagnostic accuracy of the InGrip digital dynamometer compared with the Jamar hydraulic model in older adults.European geriatric medicine · 2026Trial
- Cognition, Physical Performance, and Fall-Related Mobility Outcomes in Healthy Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Multimodal ultrasound in the assessment of muscle involvement in systemic sclerosis patients: results from a bicentric study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- The association between sarcopenic obesity, sarcopenia and functional dependence, malnutrition, and mortality: the phenomenon of obesity paradox in sarcopenic obesity.European geriatric medicine · 2025Article
- Validity and reliability of Gripwise digital dynamometer in the assessment of handgrip strength in older adults.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSarcopenia diagnosis is partly based on handgrip strength (HGS) assessment. The gold-standard dynamometer for this measurement is the Jamar. The electronic Gripwise is a smaller and lighter one, and its measurements are correlated with the Jamar's in laboratory tests. Our study aimed to confirm this correlation in aged patients.
methodsThis monocenter cross-sectional study was performed in patients of 65 years and older admitted at the University Hospital. Participants were assessed either in a seated or bedridden position, randomly allocated to begin the measurements with the Jamar or the Gripwise.
resultsAmong 649 aged inpatients assessed for eligibility, 348 were included (mean age: 79 ± 9; 52% females). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-0.94, p < .001) for the maximum value measured with both devices and 0.94 (95% CI 0.93-0.95, p < .001) for the mean values. However, there was a significant difference in detecting low values (<16 kg in women, <27 kg in men), found in 48% of patients with Jamar, and 71% with Gripwise (p < .001). Thus, we determined alternate cutoffs for diagnosing HGS low values with the Gripwise (<12 kg in women, <22 kg in men), further validated in a supplementary validation population (n = 70). The diagnostic performances of these alternative cutoffs were high (93% sensitivity and 87% specificity in women; 94% sensitivity and 96% specificity in men).
conclusionsThe correlation of the Gripwise with the Jamar was confirmed in aged inpatients. However, lower values recorded with the Gripwise require alternate cutoffs for a relevant low HGS diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.