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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Bone (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2010-04, Vol.46 (4), p.964-969
Hauptverfasser: Rantalainen, Timo, Nikander, Riku, Heinonen, Ari, Multanen, Juhani, Häkkinen, Arja, Jämsä, Timo, Kiviranta, Ilkka, Linnamo, Vesa, Komi, Paavo V, Sievänen, Harri
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 &amp; 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