Back

Rate of Force Development is Related to Maximal Force, Muscle Quality and Physical Function in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Predialysis

Gollie, J. M.; Harris-Love, M. O.; Patel, S. S.; Blackman, M. R.

2019-12-11 nephrology
10.1101/19013557 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPhysical function is severely compromised in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and worsens with continued decreases in kidney function. Neuromuscular force capacity is a key determinant of physical function in healthy older adults, though its importance in persons with CKD is less understood. MethodsThis study aimed to determine the relationships among rate of force development (RFD), muscle quality and physical function in a group of community-dwelling, middle-aged and older men (n=14; age=71.2{+/-}6.2 years) with CKD stages 3 and 4 (eGFR=37.5{+/-}10.4 ml/min per 1.73 m2). Force characteristics were determined from maximal knee extensor isometric contractions and muscle quality was estimated using ultrasound grayscale analysis. Physical function was assessed by the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and 5-repetition sit-to-stand (STS) test. ResultseGFR was directly related to SPPB (r=0.54, p=0.044) and inversely related to STS (r=-0.62, p=0.029). RFD was positively related to SPPB at time points 0-50 ms, 50-100 ms, and 0-300 ms (RFD0-50, r=0.73, p=0.010; RFD50-100, r=0.67, p=0.022 and RFD0-300 r=0.61, p=0.045); and inversely related to STS at time points 0-50 ms, 50-100 ms, and 0-300 ms (RFD0-50, r=-0.78, p=0.007; RFD50-100, r=-0.78, p=0.006 and RFD0-300 r=-0.76, p=0.009), respectively. RFD was positively associated with maximal voluntary force (MVF) at times 50-100 ms, 100-200 ms, and 0-300 ms (RFD50-100, r=0.72, p=0.011; RFD100-200, r=0.66, p=0.025; and RFD0-300 r=0.70, p=0.016), respectively. Neither MVF nor muscle quality was significantly associated with functional measures. ConclusionsRFD is an important determinant of physical function in middle-aged and older men with CKD stages 3 and 4.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.