Neuromuscular performance and body mass as indices of bone loading in premenopausal and postmenopausal women
Abstract The strong association between body mass and skeletal robusticity has been attributed to increasing skeletal loading with increasing mass. However, it is unclear whether body mass is merely a coarse substitute for bone loading rather than a true independent predictor of bone strength. As in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Bone (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2010-04, Vol.46 (4), p.964-969 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 969 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 964 |
container_title | Bone (New York, N.Y.) |
container_volume | 46 |
creator | Rantalainen, Timo Nikander, Riku Heinonen, Ari Multanen, Juhani Häkkinen, Arja Jämsä, Timo Kiviranta, Ilkka Linnamo, Vesa Komi, Paavo V Sievänen, Harri |
description | Abstract The strong association between body mass and skeletal robusticity has been attributed to increasing skeletal loading with increasing mass. However, it is unclear whether body mass is merely a coarse substitute for bone loading rather than a true independent predictor of bone strength. As indices of neuromuscular performance, impulse and peak power were determined from vertical ground reaction force during a maximal counter movement jump test in 221 premenopausal and 82 postmenopausal women. Bone compressive (BSId g2 /cm4 ) and bending (SSImaxmid mm3 ) strength indices were measured with peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) at the distal (d ) and midshaft (mid ) sites of the tibia. A two-step forced regression model for predicting bone strength indices was constructed. Age, height and body mass were entered first, followed by impulse as an indicator of skeletal loading. The basic model explained 14% ( P < 0.001) of the variance in BSId in the premenopausal group and 16% ( P = 0.004) in the postmenopausal group, and 32% ( P < 0.001) and 25% ( P < 0.001) of the variance in SSImaxnud respectively. Entering impulse into the model increased the explanatory power by 9% ( P < 0.001) and 7% ( P < 0.001) for BSId and by 8% ( P < 0.001) and 12% ( P < 0.001) for SSImaxmid . Furthermore, impulse replaced body mass as an independent significant factor explaining the variance in bone strength. These results indicate that neuromuscular performance should be measured and preferred over body mass in models predicting skeletal robusticity. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.bone.2010.01.002 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_877569233</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S8756328210000062</els_id><sourcerecordid>733455304</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-d9985ca732fd913080435b67d07779e77459a6a84d237cca870717df100b65b53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU-v1CAUxYnR-OaNfgEXhp2rjhdogW5MzIt_XvKiC3VNKNyajhQqTDXz7aXO07iTDeHknAv8DiHPGBwYMPnyeBhSxAOHKgA7APAHZMe0Eg1XUjwkO6062Qiu-RW5LuUIAKJX7DG54gCylYLvSPiAa07zWtwabKYL5jHl2UaH1EZPh-TPdLalUFvoFP3ksNA00u1iGpL1U_xadbpknDGmxa7Fht_JJZXTP9LPVA9PyKPRhoJP7_c9-fL2zeeb983dx3e3N6_vGid0f2p83-vOWSX46HsmQEMrukEqD0qpHpVqu95Kq1vPhXLOagWKKT8ygEF2Qyf25MVl7pLT9xXLycxTcRiCjZjWYrSqYHouxH-dSoi260R9wJ7wi9PlVErG0Sx5mm0-GwZmq8MczUbFbHUYYKbWUUPP78evw4z-b-QP_2p4dTFgxfFjwmxcmOLkbPiGZyzHtOZYSRlmCjdgPm2NboXWr9YlufgFotScVg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>733455304</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Neuromuscular performance and body mass as indices of bone loading in premenopausal and postmenopausal women</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Rantalainen, Timo ; Nikander, Riku ; Heinonen, Ari ; Multanen, Juhani ; Häkkinen, Arja ; Jämsä, Timo ; Kiviranta, Ilkka ; Linnamo, Vesa ; Komi, Paavo V ; Sievänen, Harri</creator><creatorcontrib>Rantalainen, Timo ; Nikander, Riku ; Heinonen, Ari ; Multanen, Juhani ; Häkkinen, Arja ; Jämsä, Timo ; Kiviranta, Ilkka ; Linnamo, Vesa ; Komi, Paavo V ; Sievänen, Harri</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[Abstract The strong association between body mass and skeletal robusticity has been attributed to increasing skeletal loading with increasing mass. However, it is unclear whether body mass is merely a coarse substitute for bone loading rather than a true independent predictor of bone strength. As indices of neuromuscular performance, impulse and peak power were determined from vertical ground reaction force during a maximal counter movement jump test in 221 premenopausal and 82 postmenopausal women. Bone compressive (BSId g2 /cm4 ) and bending (SSImaxmid mm3 ) strength indices were measured with peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) at the distal (d ) and midshaft (mid ) sites of the tibia. A two-step forced regression model for predicting bone strength indices was constructed. Age, height and body mass were entered first, followed by impulse as an indicator of skeletal loading. The basic model explained 14% ( P < 0.001) of the variance in BSId in the premenopausal group and 16% ( P = 0.004) in the postmenopausal group, and 32% ( P < 0.001) and 25% ( P < 0.001) of the variance in SSImaxnud respectively. Entering impulse into the model increased the explanatory power by 9% ( P < 0.001) and 7% ( P < 0.001) for BSId and by 8% ( P < 0.001) and 12% ( P < 0.001) for SSImaxmid . Furthermore, impulse replaced body mass as an independent significant factor explaining the variance in bone strength. These results indicate that neuromuscular performance should be measured and preferred over body mass in models predicting skeletal robusticity.]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 8756-3282</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2763</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2010.01.002</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20064632</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Adult ; Age Factors ; Body Composition - physiology ; Body Weight - physiology ; Compressive Strength - physiology ; Female ; Humans ; Middle Aged ; Movement - physiology ; Muscle Contraction - physiology ; Muscle Strength - physiology ; Orthopedics ; Osteoarthritis - diagnostic imaging ; Osteoarthritis - physiopathology ; Physical Exertion - physiology ; Postmenopause - physiology ; Premenopause - physiology ; Radiography ; Regression Analysis ; Stress, Mechanical ; Tibia - diagnostic imaging ; Tibia - physiology ; Weight-Bearing - physiology</subject><ispartof>Bone (New York, N.Y.), 2010-04, Vol.46 (4), p.964-969</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-d9985ca732fd913080435b67d07779e77459a6a84d237cca870717df100b65b53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-d9985ca732fd913080435b67d07779e77459a6a84d237cca870717df100b65b53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27926,27927</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20064632$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rantalainen, Timo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nikander, Riku</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heinonen, Ari</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Multanen, Juhani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Häkkinen, Arja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jämsä, Timo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kiviranta, Ilkka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Linnamo, Vesa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Komi, Paavo V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sievänen, Harri</creatorcontrib><title>Neuromuscular performance and body mass as indices of bone loading in premenopausal and postmenopausal women</title><title>Bone (New York, N.Y.)</title><addtitle>Bone</addtitle><description><![CDATA[Abstract The strong association between body mass and skeletal robusticity has been attributed to increasing skeletal loading with increasing mass. However, it is unclear whether body mass is merely a coarse substitute for bone loading rather than a true independent predictor of bone strength. As indices of neuromuscular performance, impulse and peak power were determined from vertical ground reaction force during a maximal counter movement jump test in 221 premenopausal and 82 postmenopausal women. Bone compressive (BSId g2 /cm4 ) and bending (SSImaxmid mm3 ) strength indices were measured with peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) at the distal (d ) and midshaft (mid ) sites of the tibia. A two-step forced regression model for predicting bone strength indices was constructed. Age, height and body mass were entered first, followed by impulse as an indicator of skeletal loading. The basic model explained 14% ( P < 0.001) of the variance in BSId in the premenopausal group and 16% ( P = 0.004) in the postmenopausal group, and 32% ( P < 0.001) and 25% ( P < 0.001) of the variance in SSImaxnud respectively. Entering impulse into the model increased the explanatory power by 9% ( P < 0.001) and 7% ( P < 0.001) for BSId and by 8% ( P < 0.001) and 12% ( P < 0.001) for SSImaxmid . Furthermore, impulse replaced body mass as an independent significant factor explaining the variance in bone strength. These results indicate that neuromuscular performance should be measured and preferred over body mass in models predicting skeletal robusticity.]]></description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Age Factors</subject><subject>Body Composition - physiology</subject><subject>Body Weight - physiology</subject><subject>Compressive Strength - physiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Movement - physiology</subject><subject>Muscle Contraction - physiology</subject><subject>Muscle Strength - physiology</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis - physiopathology</subject><subject>Physical Exertion - physiology</subject><subject>Postmenopause - physiology</subject><subject>Premenopause - physiology</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Regression Analysis</subject><subject>Stress, Mechanical</subject><subject>Tibia - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Tibia - physiology</subject><subject>Weight-Bearing - physiology</subject><issn>8756-3282</issn><issn>1873-2763</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU-v1CAUxYnR-OaNfgEXhp2rjhdogW5MzIt_XvKiC3VNKNyajhQqTDXz7aXO07iTDeHknAv8DiHPGBwYMPnyeBhSxAOHKgA7APAHZMe0Eg1XUjwkO6062Qiu-RW5LuUIAKJX7DG54gCylYLvSPiAa07zWtwabKYL5jHl2UaH1EZPh-TPdLalUFvoFP3ksNA00u1iGpL1U_xadbpknDGmxa7Fht_JJZXTP9LPVA9PyKPRhoJP7_c9-fL2zeeb983dx3e3N6_vGid0f2p83-vOWSX46HsmQEMrukEqD0qpHpVqu95Kq1vPhXLOagWKKT8ygEF2Qyf25MVl7pLT9xXLycxTcRiCjZjWYrSqYHouxH-dSoi260R9wJ7wi9PlVErG0Sx5mm0-GwZmq8MczUbFbHUYYKbWUUPP78evw4z-b-QP_2p4dTFgxfFjwmxcmOLkbPiGZyzHtOZYSRlmCjdgPm2NboXWr9YlufgFotScVg</recordid><startdate>20100401</startdate><enddate>20100401</enddate><creator>Rantalainen, Timo</creator><creator>Nikander, Riku</creator><creator>Heinonen, Ari</creator><creator>Multanen, Juhani</creator><creator>Häkkinen, Arja</creator><creator>Jämsä, Timo</creator><creator>Kiviranta, Ilkka</creator><creator>Linnamo, Vesa</creator><creator>Komi, Paavo V</creator><creator>Sievänen, Harri</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100401</creationdate><title>Neuromuscular performance and body mass as indices of bone loading in premenopausal and postmenopausal women</title><author>Rantalainen, Timo ; Nikander, Riku ; Heinonen, Ari ; Multanen, Juhani ; Häkkinen, Arja ; Jämsä, Timo ; Kiviranta, Ilkka ; Linnamo, Vesa ; Komi, Paavo V ; Sievänen, Harri</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-d9985ca732fd913080435b67d07779e77459a6a84d237cca870717df100b65b53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Age Factors</topic><topic>Body Composition - physiology</topic><topic>Body Weight - physiology</topic><topic>Compressive Strength - physiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Movement - physiology</topic><topic>Muscle Contraction - physiology</topic><topic>Muscle Strength - physiology</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis - physiopathology</topic><topic>Physical Exertion - physiology</topic><topic>Postmenopause - physiology</topic><topic>Premenopause - physiology</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Regression Analysis</topic><topic>Stress, Mechanical</topic><topic>Tibia - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Tibia - physiology</topic><topic>Weight-Bearing - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rantalainen, Timo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nikander, Riku</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heinonen, Ari</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Multanen, Juhani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Häkkinen, Arja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jämsä, Timo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kiviranta, Ilkka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Linnamo, Vesa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Komi, Paavo V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sievänen, Harri</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Bone (New York, N.Y.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rantalainen, Timo</au><au>Nikander, Riku</au><au>Heinonen, Ari</au><au>Multanen, Juhani</au><au>Häkkinen, Arja</au><au>Jämsä, Timo</au><au>Kiviranta, Ilkka</au><au>Linnamo, Vesa</au><au>Komi, Paavo V</au><au>Sievänen, Harri</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Neuromuscular performance and body mass as indices of bone loading in premenopausal and postmenopausal women</atitle><jtitle>Bone (New York, N.Y.)</jtitle><addtitle>Bone</addtitle><date>2010-04-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>46</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>964</spage><epage>969</epage><pages>964-969</pages><issn>8756-3282</issn><eissn>1873-2763</eissn><abstract><![CDATA[Abstract The strong association between body mass and skeletal robusticity has been attributed to increasing skeletal loading with increasing mass. However, it is unclear whether body mass is merely a coarse substitute for bone loading rather than a true independent predictor of bone strength. As indices of neuromuscular performance, impulse and peak power were determined from vertical ground reaction force during a maximal counter movement jump test in 221 premenopausal and 82 postmenopausal women. Bone compressive (BSId g2 /cm4 ) and bending (SSImaxmid mm3 ) strength indices were measured with peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) at the distal (d ) and midshaft (mid ) sites of the tibia. A two-step forced regression model for predicting bone strength indices was constructed. Age, height and body mass were entered first, followed by impulse as an indicator of skeletal loading. The basic model explained 14% ( P < 0.001) of the variance in BSId in the premenopausal group and 16% ( P = 0.004) in the postmenopausal group, and 32% ( P < 0.001) and 25% ( P < 0.001) of the variance in SSImaxnud respectively. Entering impulse into the model increased the explanatory power by 9% ( P < 0.001) and 7% ( P < 0.001) for BSId and by 8% ( P < 0.001) and 12% ( P < 0.001) for SSImaxmid . Furthermore, impulse replaced body mass as an independent significant factor explaining the variance in bone strength. These results indicate that neuromuscular performance should be measured and preferred over body mass in models predicting skeletal robusticity.]]></abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>20064632</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.bone.2010.01.002</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 8756-3282 |
ispartof | Bone (New York, N.Y.), 2010-04, Vol.46 (4), p.964-969 |
issn | 8756-3282 1873-2763 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_877569233 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Adult Age Factors Body Composition - physiology Body Weight - physiology Compressive Strength - physiology Female Humans Middle Aged Movement - physiology Muscle Contraction - physiology Muscle Strength - physiology Orthopedics Osteoarthritis - diagnostic imaging Osteoarthritis - physiopathology Physical Exertion - physiology Postmenopause - physiology Premenopause - physiology Radiography Regression Analysis Stress, Mechanical Tibia - diagnostic imaging Tibia - physiology Weight-Bearing - physiology |
title | Neuromuscular performance and body mass as indices of bone loading in premenopausal and postmenopausal women |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-17T22%3A24%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Neuromuscular%20performance%20and%20body%20mass%20as%20indices%20of%20bone%20loading%20in%20premenopausal%20and%20postmenopausal%20women&rft.jtitle=Bone%20(New%20York,%20N.Y.)&rft.au=Rantalainen,%20Timo&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=964&rft.epage=969&rft.pages=964-969&rft.issn=8756-3282&rft.eissn=1873-2763&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bone.2010.01.002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E733455304%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=733455304&rft_id=info:pmid/20064632&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S8756328210000062&rfr_iscdi=true |