==== Front Clin Kidney JClin Kidney JckjClinical Kidney Journal2048-85052048-8513Oxford University Press 3009062910.1093/ckj/sfx139sfx139HemodialysisHand grip strength measurement in haemodialysis patients: before or after the session? Delanaye Pierre 1Quinonez Kevin 1Buckinx Fanny 2Krzesinski Jean-Marie 1Bruyère Olivier 21 Department of Nephrology, Dialysis, Hypertension, University of Liège (ULg CHU), Liège, Belgium2 Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège (ULg CHU), Liège, BelgiumCorrespondence and offprint requests to: Pierre Delanaye; E-mail: pierre_delanaye@yahoo.frPierre Delanaye and Kevin Quinonez authors equally contributed to this work. 8 2018 19 12 2017 19 12 2017 11 4 555 558 03 8 2017 05 11 2017 © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA.2017This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.comAbstract Background Hand grip strength (HGS) is a key measurement in the assessment of frailty phenotype in haemodialysis patients. However, the measurement is not very standardized, and notably, current data on the potential impact of a haemodialysis session on the results are both limited and controversial. In the present analysis, we compared HGS results before and after a haemodialysis session in 101 patients. Methods In the current observational study, HGS has been measured in adult haemodialysis patients on the same day, first before connection to the dialysis machine and then just after disconnection. At each timing, measurements were repeated three times with an interval of 5 s between measurements and the higher value was used for analysis. Results One hundred and one patients (64% men) with a median (interquartile range, 25th percentile; 75th percentile) age of 66 (46; 76) years were included. In the whole population, a significant decline in HGS was observed after dialysis, with an absolute median decline of − 4 (0; −6) kg and a relative median difference of −11 (0; −20)%. These differences were observed in both genders and were independent of the baseline HGS value. Conclusions Our results suggest that the timing (before or after the dialysis session) of hand grip assessment is clinically relevant and should be taken into account in clinical practice and also in epidemiological and clinical studies. chronic haemodialysiselderlyfrailtyhand grip strength ==== Body Introduction Hand grip strength (HGS) is a key parameter in the definition of several important phenotypes in medicine such as sarcopaenia, malnutrition or frailty [1–3]. These concepts have also been studied in the specific population of dialysis patients, showing a high prevalence, and strong association with mortality [4–17]. The classical technique to measure HGS uses a dynamometer. The method is simple, rapid, inexpensive and standardized in the geriatric population [18]. The method is, however, less standardized in haemodialysis patients [8, 9, 19–21]. Few data are available about the influence of the timing of the measurement, i.e. before or after the dialysis session, on the results [9, 21]. This is the goal of the present study. Materials and methods In this observational study, HGS results were compared before and after a dialysis session in patients of the University Hospital of Liège, Belgium between February and October 2016. All patients at our centre who were able to walk on their own were considered for the analysis. Nineteen patients could not (dementia), or refused to, sign the consent. HGS results were not available after the dialysis session in seven patients, leading to a final sample of 101 patients. HGS was measured in the same patient, in the same condition, and on the same day, before connection to the dialysis machine, and then just after disconnection. Before and after the dialysis session, measurements were repeated three times with an interval of 5 s between measurements and the higher value was used for analysis [19]. The same Jamar dynamometer (Jamar® Hydraulic Hand Dynamometer, Model 5030J1, Patterson Medical, Warrenville, IL, USA) with a usual precision of 0.5 kg was used for all measurements, in Position 2 [22]. Measurements were realized in a sitting position with the dominant arm extended [18]. The criteria proposed by Fried was considered to define low versus normal HGS values (Table 1) [1]. Table 1. Definition of low HGS results according to Fried criteria [1] Men Women BMI (kg/m2) Cut-off for HGS criterion for frailty (kg) BMI (kg/m2) Cut-off for HGS criterion for frailty (kg) ≤24 ≤29 ≤23 ≤17 24.1–26 ≤30 23.1–26 ≤17.3 26.1–28 ≤30 26.1–29 ≤18 >28 ≤32 >29 ≤21 The protocol was approved by the hospital Ethics Committee (Belgian number: B707201525774) and all patients signed informed consent. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation when distribution was normal and as median with interquartile range (25th percentile; 75th percentile) when not. Wilcoxon tests were used to compare results before and after dialysis and Mann–Withney test to compare results of different subgroups. McNemar test was used to study percentages of patients with low HGS results and Pearson’s coefficient of correlation to study association between HGS and age. Regression analysis was used to study the potential linear relationship between HGS before dialysis or the difference of results before and after dialysis on one hand, and clinical or dialysis parameters on the other. Multivariate analysis was performed using stepwise backward selection. The following variables were available to be used in the model: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), dialysis vintage, hours of dialysis and dialysis mode (haemodiafiltration versus haemodialysis). All statistics have been performed with MedCalc (Mariakerke, Belgium). Results One hundred and one patients were included, and 64% were men. Median age was 66 (46; 76) years (mean value 60 ± 20). Mean dry weight was 68.1 ± 16.3 kg, mean height was 167 ± 11 cm and median BMI was 23.8 (20.8; 26.8) kg/m2. Forty-two percent were diabetic, 88% were hypertensive and 44% had a history of cardiovascular disease. Among dialysis parameters, median dialysis vintage was 25 (11.5; 48) months, 71% were treated by haemodiafiltration and 29% by haemodialysis, and the vast majority of patients were treated by a 4-h session (only 4% of patients were treated <4 h). Twenty percent of patients were dialysed on a catheter, whereas 80% were dialysed on a fistula [among the 81 patients dialysed on a fistula, 15 (19%) had fistula on the dominant arm]. Median HGS values before dialysis session was 28 (20; 38.5) kg. Women had lower HGS values compared with men: 20 (14; 26) versus 34 (24; 40.5) kg, respectively, (P < 0.0001) (Table 2). A negative correlation was found between HGS results and age (r = −0.54, P < 0.0001). In the multiple regression analysis, age, female gender, BMI and dialysis modality (patients treated by haemodiafiltration had higher HGS results) were associated with HGS results. Using the widely adopted cut-off to define low muscle strength [1], 41% of patients had low HGS before dialysis session (39% of women and 42% of men, not significant). HGS results after dialysis are shown in Table 2. Results after dialysis were significantly lower than before [24 (16; 36) versus 28 (20; 38.5) kg, P < 0.0001]. The median decline was −4 (0;−6) kg and relative median difference was −11 (0;−20)% (Table 3). Such a significant difference was equally observed in both genders (Table 3). The decline in HGS was present in patients with normal baseline results (n = 60): 36 (28–44) versus 34 (23–41) kg before and after dialysis (P < 0.0001), respectively. In patients with low baseline results (n = 41), a significant lower value was also observed after dialysis: 20 (14–24.5) kg versus 16 (11.5–20.5) kg (P < 0.0001). The percentage of patients with low HGS values increased from 41% before the session to 54% after the session (P = 0.001). Table 2. HGS results in the global population and according to gender Median (P25; P75) HGS (kg) before dialysis Median (P25; P75) HGS (kg) after dialysis P-values (before and after dialysis) (Wilcoxon test) Percentage decrease in HGS All (n = 101) 28 (20–38.5) 24 (16–36) <0.0001 41 Men (n = 65) 34 (24–40.5) 30 (20–40) <0.0001 42 Women (n = 36) 20 (14–26) 18 (12–22) <0.0001 39 HGS results are significantly lower in women. All results after dialysis were significantly lower than results before dialysis. P25 and P75 for 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. Table 3. Absolute and relative differences between HGS according to gender and baseline HGS (low versus normal) Absolute median (P25; P75) difference of HGS before and after dialysis Relative median (P25; P75) difference of HGS before and after dialysis (%) P-values (before and after dialysis) (Wilcoxon test) All (n = 101) −4 (0; −6) −11 (0; −20) <0.0001 Men (n = 65) −4 (0; −6) −9 (0; −17) <0.0001 Women (n = 36) −2 (1; −4) −14 (−3; −23) <0.0001 Low baseline results (n = 41) −2 (0; −4) −14 (0; −22) <0.0001 Normal baseline results (n = 60) −4 (0; −6) −10 (0; −17) <0.0001 P25 and P75 for 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. Discussion In the current analysis, we showed that the timing of the hand grip measurement, i.e. before or after a dialysis session, impacts the results. Indeed, both a statistically significant and clinically relevant decline in HGS is observed after the dialysis session. The decline in HGS after dialysis leads to an increase of 13% of patients who would be considered to have low HGS, according to the Fried frailty score [1]. To the best of our knowledge, only two previous publications had studied the impact of the timing on the results of HGS in haemodialysis patients. Both were on Brazilian patients, but showed discrepant results [9, 21]. Leal et al. showed no difference in HGS before and after dialysis [9]. They also measured HGS with arm extended, but on the arm without fistula. Mean age, weight and height were similar to the current cohort. However, the sample size was limited (n = 43); HGS results were much lower in this cohort (14 ± 7 and 30 ± 10 kg in women and men, respectively) than in ours. Importantly, it was not clear from this publication when the measurements of HGS were realized (before or after the connection to the machine). Pinto et al. also measured HGS on the arm without fistula but with the elbow flexed at a 90-degree angle [21]. Measurement was realized before connection to the machine. The sample was larger than in Leal et al. or our study (n = 156). Mean weight and BMI were similar to our cohort but the patients were younger (median 56 years old) and fewer were diabetic (28.8%). HGS results were similar to the values we observed (24 ± 10 and 33 ± 11 kg in women and men, respectively). They also observed a significant decline of HGS after the dialysis session, even if the magnitude of this decline seems less important than in our patients (from 28.6 ± 11.4 to 27.7 ± 11.7 kg). If the timing is relevant, there is also a debate in the literature regarding the choice of the arm to be tested. Some authors prefer to consider the arm without fistula, arguing that problems with the fistula could occur (especially a risk of bleeding because the arm is overexerted after the session) [8]. Like other authors [20], we measured HGS on the dominant arm but just before connection and just after disconnection (after bleeding stopped), to limit the impact on the fistula. The choice of the dominant arm can be justified in the light of a need for standardization. Indeed, measuring HGS on the dominant arm is the only way to compare adequately patients dialysed with a fistula versus a catheter (20% in the current cohort) or haemodialysed patients with patients on peritoneal dialysis or transplanted [23]. In our cohort, patients with fistula on the dominant arm (n = 15) had the same median HGS results (both before and after dialysis) as patients with fistula on the non-dominant arm (n = 69) (data not shown). Further studies with a larger sample size are mandatory to study the impact of the fistula on HGS results. The current study is observational, and possible reasons that could explain such differences in results before and after the dialysis session are hypothetical: (i) ultrafiltration over a 4-h period is not physiological [8]; (ii) dialysis session is an important source of oxidant stress, which could impact the muscular function [24, 25]; and (iii) dialysis induces large modifications of different ions concentrations that could also impact the muscle strength [26]. In the current cohort, no correlation was found between ultrafiltration (absolute or scaled to dry weight) and the difference of HGS before and after the dialysis (data not shown). There are limitations to this study. We used the definition of low HGS results according the references values proposed by Fried to define the phenotype of frailty [1]. Even though these normal reference ranges have been used by others in dialysis populations [7, 10, 27], the establishment of normality could require specific studies in dialysis cohorts [8]. We suspect that HGS results could be influenced by the dialysis session in itself (and events that can randomly occur during the session, such as hypotension), suggesting that HGS results before the session could be preferable. However, this remains to be proven by longitudinal studies comparing the predictive value of HGS before and after the session on clinical outcomes. In the present analysis, we focused on one important factor (the timing of measurement) potentially influencing the results in the same patient (intra-patient variability). We did not study the impact of the day of week on the measurement. Also, it was beyond the scope of the study to analyse the factors that explain differences in HGS between patients (inter-patient variability). In this context, we have not extensively studied all the potential factors (inflammation, dialysis efficiency, etc.) influencing the HGS results in dialysis patients. However, in our limited model, we confirmed that gender and age influenced HGS results [8, 12, 15, 21, 28, 29]. Also, the impact of dialysis modality is associated with HGS but there is a high risk of bias by indication, the frailer patients being treated by haemodialysis in our institution. In conclusion, we confirmed that HGS significantly decreases after the dialysis session, in both males and females and in patients with both normal and low HGS results at baseline [21]. The timing of the HGS measurement should be taken into account in clinic practice as well as in further epidemiological and clinical studies. To decrease the intra-patient variability of HGS measurement observed in dialysis patients, it is mandatory to measure HGS at the same timing with regards to the dialysis session, and we suggest that before the dialysis session (before connection to the machine) would be the best moment. Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the data nurse manager Arnaud Borsu for his help in the collection of data. Conflict of interest statement None declared. ==== Refs References 1 Fried LP , Tangen CM , Walston J et al Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001 ; 56 : M146 –M156 11253156 2 Dodds RM , Syddall HE , Cooper R et al Global variation in grip strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis of normative data . Age Ageing 2016 ; 45 : 209 –216 26790455 3 Norman K , Stobäus N , Gonzalez MC et al Hand grip strength: outcome predictor and marker of nutritional status . Clin Nutr 2011 ; 30 : 135 –142 21035927 4 Johansen KL , Dalrymple LS , Delgado C et al Association between body composition and frailty among prevalent hemodialysis patients: a US Renal Data System Special Study . J Am Soc Nephrol 2014 ; 25 : 381 –389 24158987 5 Kittiskulnam P , Chertow GM , Carrero JJ et al Sarcopenia and its individual criteria are associated, in part, with mortality among patients on hemodialysis . Kidney Int 2017 ; 92 : 238 –247 28318630 6 Johansen KL , Dalrymple LS , Delgado C et al Factors associated with frailty and its trajectory among patients on hemodialysis . Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2017 ; 12 : 1100 –1108 28576906 7 Johansen KL , Chertow GM , Jin C et al Significance of frailty among dialysis patients . J Am Soc Nephrol 2007 ; 18 : 2960 –2967 17942958 8 Leal VO , Mafra D , Fouque D et al Use of handgrip strength in the assessment of the muscle function of chronic kidney disease patients on dialysis: a systematic review . Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011 ; 26 : 1354 –1360 20709742 9 Leal VO , Stockler-Pinto MB , Farage NE et al Handgrip strength and its dialysis determinants in hemodialysis patients . Nutrition 2011 ; 27 : 1125 –1129 21454052 10 van Loon IN , Goto NA , Boereboom FTJ et al Frailty screening tools for elderly patients incident to dialysis . Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2017 ; 12 : 1280 –1288 11 van Loon IN , Wouters TR , Boereboom FTJ et al The relevance of geriatric impairments in patients starting dialysis: a systematic review . Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2016 ; 11 : 1245 –1259 27117581 12 Wang AY , Sea MM , Ho ZS et al Evaluation of handgrip strength as a nutritional marker and prognostic indicator in peritoneal dialysis patients . Am J Clin Nutr 2005 ; 81 : 79 –86 15640464 13 Fouque D , Kalantar-Zadeh K , Kopple J et al A proposed nomenclature and diagnostic criteria for protein-energy wasting in acute and chronic kidney disease . Kidney Int 2008 ; 73 : 391 –398 18094682 14 Heimbürger O , Qureshi AR , Blaner WS et al Hand-grip muscle strength, lean body mass, and plasma proteins as markers of nutritional status in patients with chronic renal failure close to start of dialysis therapy . Am J Kidney Dis 2000 ; 36 : 1213 –1225 11096047 15 Stenvinkel P , Barany P , Chung SH et al A comparative analysis of nutritional parameters as predictors of outcome in male and female ESRD patients . Nephrol Dial Transplant 2002 ; 17 : 1266 –1274 12105251 16 Vogt BP , Borges MC , Goés CR et al Handgrip strength is an independent predictor of all-cause mortality in maintenance dialysis patients . Clin Nutr 2016 ; 35 : 1429 –1433 27083497 17 Chang YT , Wu HL , Guo HR et al Handgrip strength is an independent predictor of renal outcomes in patients with chronic kidney diseases . Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011 ; 26 : 3588 –3595 21444362 18 Roberts HC , Denison HJ , Martin HJ et al A review of the measurement of grip strength in clinical and epidemiological studies: towards a standardised approach . Age Ageing 2011 ; 40 : 423 –429 21624928 19 Jamal SA , Leiter RE , Jassal V et al Impaired muscle strength is associated with fractures in hemodialysis patients . Osteoporos Int 2006 ; 17 : 1390 –1397 16799753 20 Carrero JJ , Chmielewski M , Axelsson J et al Muscle atrophy, inflammation and clinical outcome in incident and prevalent dialysis patients . Clin Nutr 2008 ; 27 : 557 –564 18538898 21 Pinto AP , Ramos CI , Meireles MS et al Impact of hemodialysis session on handgrip strength . J Bras Nephrol 2015 ; 37 : 451 –457 22 Limaye V , Frankham A , Disney A et al Evaluation of hand function in patients undergoing long term haemodialysis . Ann Rheum Dis 2001 ; 60 : 278 –280 11171692 23 Kang SH , Do JY , Lee S-Y et al Effect of dialysis modality on frailty phenotype, disability, and health-related quality of life in maintenance dialysis patients . Plos One 2017 ; 12 : e0176814 28467472 24 Howden EJ , Fassett RG , Isbel NM et al Exercise training in chronic kidney disease patients . Sports Med 2012 ; 42 : 473 –488 22587820 25 Chandwaney R , Leichtweis S , Leeuwenburgh C et al Oxidative stress and mitochondrial function in skeletal muscle: effects of aging and exercise training . Age (Omaha) 1998 ; 21 : 109 –117 23604368 26 Babsky EB , Minajev PF. Combined action upon muscle of adenosine triphosphate, acetylcholine and potassium, calcium and magnesium ions . Nature 1946 ; 158 : 238 27 Carrero JJ , Johansen KL , Lindholm B et al Screening for muscle wasting and dysfunction in patients with chronic kidney disease . Kidney Int 2016 ; 90 : 53 –66 27157695 28 Schlüssel MM , dos Anjos LA , de Vasconcellos MT et al Reference values of handgrip dynamometry of healthy adults: a population-based study . Clin Nutr 2008 ; 27 : 601 –607 18547686 29 Qureshi AR , Alvestrand A , Danielsson A et al Factors predicting malnutrition in hemodialysis patients: a cross-sectional study . Kidney Int 1998 ; 53 : 773 –782 9507226