Association of Nutritional Intake with Physical Activity and Handgrip Strength in Individuals with Airflow Limitation

Article information

Tuberc Respir Dis. 2025;88(1):120-129
Publication date (electronic) : 2024 October 11
doi : https://doi.org/10.4046/trd.2024.0017
1Department of Internal Medicine, Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital, Gyeongsang National University College of Medicine, Changwon, Republic of Korea
2Department of Internal Medicine, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Gyeongsang National University College of Medicine, Jinju, Republic of Korea
Address for correspondence Ho Cheol Kim, M.D., Ph.D. Department of Internal Medicine, Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital, Gyeongsang National University College of Medicine, 11 Samjeongja-ro, Seongsan-gu, Changwon 51472, Republic of Korea Phone 82-55-214-3730 Fax 82-55-214-8618 E-mail hochkim@gnu.ac.kr
Received 2024 March 1; Revised 2024 April 29; Accepted 2024 October 1.

Abstract

Background

We investigated whether nutritional intake is associated with physical activity (PA) and handgrip strength (HGS) in individuals with airflow limitation.

Methods

This study analyzed data from the 2014 and 2016 Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. We assessed total protein intake (g/day), caloric intake (kcal/day), and other nutritional intakes, using a 24-hour dietary recall questionnaire. HGS was measured three times for each hand using a digital grip strength dynamometer, and PA was assessed as health-enhancing PA. Airflow limitation was defined as a forced expiratory volume/forced vital capacity ratio of 0.7 in individuals over 40 years of age. Participants were categorized into groups based on their PA levels and HGS measurements: active aerobic PA vs. non-active aerobic PA, and normal HGS vs. low HGS.

Results

Among the 622 individuals with airflow limitation, those involved in active aerobic PA and those with higher HGS had notably higher total food, calorie, water, protein, and lipid intake. The correlations between protein and caloric intake with HGS were strong (correlation coefficients=0.344 and 0.346, respectively). The forest plots show that higher intakes of food, water, calories, protein, and lipids are positively associated with active aerobic PA, while higher intakes of these nutrients are inversely associated with low HGS. However, in the multivariate logistic regression analysis, no significant associations were observed between nutritional intake and active aerobic PA or HGS.

Conclusion

Nutritional intake was found to not be an independent factor associated with PA and HGS. However, the observed correlations suggest potential indirect effects that warrant further investigation.

Introduction

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic inflammatory condition that is primarily triggered by exposure to harmful particles or gases [1]. The implications of COPD extend beyond the respiratory system, manifesting in various systemic complications, e.g., cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, depression, lung cancer, muscle wasting, and malnutrition. This malnutrition, affecting between 5% and 50% of patients in severe cases, substantially diminishes exercise capacity, physical activity (PA), and muscle strength [2,3].

Among the multifaceted contributors to malnutrition in COPD, inadequate nutrition plays a critical role [4-6]. Dietary improvements have been shown to significantly enhance muscle strength and overall PA. For example, a controlled, randomized study involving 199 patients with COPD and compromised exercise capacity observed marked enhancements in muscle mass, respiratory, and peripheral muscle strength following nutritional and exercise interventions [7]. Similarly, meta-analyses have confirmed that nutritional supplementation in patients with COPD can lead to improvements in body weight, exercise capacity, and muscle strength, particularly in those who are undernourished [8,9].

Handgrip strength (HGS) is an important measure of muscle strength, and a key tool for diagnosing sarcopenia, especially in COPD, where muscle loss and reduced PA are common. HGS shows strong relationships with muscle strength in both the upper and lower limbs, highlighting its usefulness for diagnosis [10].

Despite the significant impact of malnutrition on muscle strength in patients with COPD, research on the direct and combined effects of dietary intake and PA on muscle strength remains limited. Therefore, this study aims to examine the associations between dietary intake, PA, and HGS as an indicator of muscle strength in individuals with airflow limitation. Additionally, the study seeks to identify specific nutritional components that may be linked to enhanced PA and muscle strength, acknowledging that due to their independent effects on HGS, these relationships may represent correlations, rather than causation.

Materials and Methods

1. Study population

This cross-sectional, observational study utilized data from the 2014 and 2016 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES VI), a comprehensive program that collects health and nutrition information from the Korean population. The dataset includes demographics, smoking status, lung function, HGS, PA, quality of life, and physician-diagnosed comorbidities, e.g., high blood pressure, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and stroke. Our study included adults aged ≥40 years who underwent spirometry measurements. We excluded individuals who did not respond to the PA and nutritional intake surveys, and those with HGS measurements and forced expiratory volume per 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratios exceeding 0.7 (Figure 1).

Fig. 1.

Flow diagram for study population I. The flow diagram showed from 15,700 participants to 622 individuals with airflow limitation by excluding those under 40 years, without spirometry, with normal forced expiratory volume per 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratios, or lacking key measurements. The categorization of the enrolled 622 participants with airflow limitation, divided into subgroups based on their aerobic physical activity (PA) and handgrip strength (HGS).

2. Assessment of spirometry parameters

Spirometry assessments were conducted in a mobile examination center by trained medical staff using dry rolling seal spirometers (Model 2130, Sensor Medics, Yorba Linda, CA, USA). Equipment calibration and quality control procedures were regularly performed, following guidelines from the American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society [11]. Post-bronchodilator spirometry was not included in this survey.

Airflow limitation was defined as the FEV1 divided by FVC ratio (FEV1/FVC) ≤0.7, in accordance with the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines. Participants were categorized into four groups based on the degree of airflow limitation following the GOLD classification: mild (GOLD stage 1, FEV1 >80% predicted), moderate (GOLD stage 2, 50% predicted≤ FEV1 <80% predicted), severe (GOLD stage 3, 30% predicted≤ FEV1 <50% predicted), and very severe (GOLD stage 4, FEV1 <30% predicted) [12].

3. Assessment of nutritional intake

Daily caloric intake was determined by analyzing the nutritional content of all consumed foods. Nutritional surveys were conducted using a computer-assisted personal interview system. Previous research has established the validity of the 24-hour dietary recall method in large-scale population studies [13]. The assessed nutrients included carbohydrates, lipids, proteins, fiber, beta-carotene, retinol, and vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, and C.

4. Assessment of PA and definition of aerobic PA

PA was assessed using the Korean version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire, obtained through the Health Interview Survey [14]. Participants reported their PA levels during a typical week. Vigorous PA was defined as activities, e.g., running, mountain climbing, soccer, basketball, that significantly increase the heart rate for at least 10 minutes. Moderate PA included activities, e.g., tennis doubles, volleyball, badminton, or those slightly increasing heart rate for at least 10 minutes. Participants also reported the daily time spent on each activity.

Consequently, participants were categorized into two groups based on their PA levels: the active aerobic PA, and non-active aerobic PA groups. Participants in the active aerobic PA group met at least one of the following criteria: engaging in at least 2 hours 30 minutes of moderate-intensity PA per week, engaging in at least 1 hour 15 minutes of high-intensity PA per week, or a combination of moderate and high-intensity activities (with 1 minute of high-intensity activity considered equivalent to 2 minutes of moderate-intensity activity).

5. Assessment of HGS and definition of low HGS

HGS was assessed using a digital grip strength dynamometer (TKK 5401, Takei Scientific Instruments Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). Each participant underwent three measurements for each hand. Trained medical staff instructed the participants to sit and hold the dynamometer with the second finger nodes of their working hand at a 90° angle to the handle. They were then asked to squeeze the dynamometer as tightly as possible. Subsequently, the participants slowly stood up, and the HGS was recorded as they exhaled. An 1-minute rest period was provided between each HGS measurement. The highest HGS value from the six measurements obtained was used for further analysis. Based on the HGS measurements, the participants were categorized into two groups: the normal HGS and low HGS groups. The classification was determined using a predefined cut-off value of 28.6 kg for men, and 16.4 kg for women [15].

6. Definition of smoking status

According to the National Health Interview Survey, a “current smoker” is defined as an adult who has smoked more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime, and is currently smoking. An adult who has smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime, but has ceased smoking at the time of the survey, is referred to as a “former smoker.” A “never-smoker” is defined as an adult who has never smoked, or has smoked fewer than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime [16].

7. Ethics

The Institutional Review Board (IRB approval number: 2013-07CON-03-4C, 2013-12EXP-03-5C, and 2018-01-03-PA) approved the KNHANES protocol of the Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. All participants provided informed consent to participate in this study.

8. Statistical analysis

The data are presented as the mean±standard deviation for continuous variables, and as numbers (percentages) for categorical variables. Categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test, and continuous variables were compared using the Student’s t-test. Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the association between HGS and variables of total food intake, water, calories, protein, lipid, and carbohydrate intake. Forest plots were used to visually represent the results of logistic regression analyses, showing the associations between nutritional intake and PA using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses examined factors associated with aerobic PA and HGS, presenting ORs with 95% CIs and p-values. The factors included age, sex, body mass index (BMI), alcohol ingestion, smoking status, and various nutritional and clinical parameters. Statistical significance was defined as p<0.05 for all comparisons. All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 25.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA).

Results

1. Baseline characteristics of the participants

Overall, 622 individuals with airflow limitation completed all questionnaires (Figure 1). Table 1 summarizes the baseline characteristics of these participants. The mean age of the participants was 66.8±9.19 years, with men constituting 73.3% of the study population. The mean FEV1/FVC ratio was 62.9±6.73, and 5.1% of the participants were classified as GOLD stage III/IV. Approximately 48.1% of the participants engaged in active aerobic PA per week. The mean HGS of the dominant hand was 31.4±8.94 kg, and 113 (18.2%) participants had low HGS based on the defined criterion (<28.6 kg in men, and <16.4 kg in women).

Baseline characteristics of the participants

2. Comparison of baseline characteristics according to aerobic PA and HGS

Based on aerobic PA, the active aerobic PA group (n=299) was characterized by a slightly lower mean age (65.9±9.15 years vs. 67.7±9.16 years, p=0.13) and a higher proportion of males (77.6% vs. 69.3%), compared to the non-active aerobic PA group (n=323) (Figure 2). Additionally, the active aerobic PA group exhibited better lung function, as indicated by significantly higher FEV1 and FVC values (2.3±0.60 vs. 2.1±0.63, p=0.001; 3.65±0.82 vs. 3.39±0.92, p<0.001). Laboratory findings revealed that the active aerobic PA group had lower glycated hemoglobin levels (5.92±0.66 vs. 6.03±0, p=0.004) and higher hemoglobin/hematocrit levels (14.5±1.32 g/dL vs. 14.1±1.49 g/dL, p=0.008; 43.5±3.61 g/dL vs. 42.9±4.15 g/dL, p=0.044, respectively). Moreover, the active aerobic PA group reported a higher EuroQol Five-Dimension (EQ-5D) index, indicating a better quality of life, compared to the non-active aerobic PA group (0.94±0.09 vs. 0.91±0.13, p=0.001). Regarding HGS, participants in the active aerobic PA group demonstrated significantly higher HGS values for both hands, HGS of the dominant hand, and HGS/BMI, while the prevalence of low HGS was significantly lower in the active aerobic PA group.

Fig. 2.

Flow diagram for study population II. The categorization of the enrolled 622 participants with airflow limitation, divided into subgroups based on their aerobic physical activity (PA) and handgrip strength (HGS).

Participants in the low HGS group (n=113) were characterized by a significantly higher mean age (72.8±6.73 years vs. 65.5±9.24 years, p<0.001) and lower BMI (23.2±2.99 kg/m2 vs. 24±2.98 kg/m2, p=0.015), compared to those in the normal HGS group (n=509) (Figure 2). Alcohol consumption was also less common in the low HGS group (37.8% vs. 57.4%, p<0.001). Lung function parameters, including FEV1, FVC, and FEV1/FVC, were significantly lower in the low HGS group (1.94±0.50 vs. 2.27±0.63, p<0.001; 3.15±0.71 vs. 3.60±0.9, p<0.001; 61.6±6.97 vs. 63.1±6.65, p=0.03, respectively). Moreover, participants in the low HGS group had a lower EQ-5D index, and a lower prevalence of active aerobic PA. In addition, participants in the low HGS group demonstrated a significantly higher rate of activity limitation, and a lower rate of vigorous and moderate activity for leisure or aerobic PA (Table 1).

3. Comparison of nutritional component intake according to aerobic PA and HGS

Among the 622 participants, those engaged in aerobic PA (n=299) and those with higher HGS (n=509) had significantly higher total food intake (1,501.9±749.93 g vs. 1,576.9±732.83 g, p=0.016), water (1,051.0±649.72 g vs. 1,112.7±634.11 g, p=0.022), calories (1,953.1±753.84 kcal vs. 2,026.8±769.09 kcal, p=0.019), protein (64.7±31.67 g vs. 68.6±31.43 g, p=0.003), and lipid (34.6±27.01 g vs. 37.7±27.85 g, p=0.005), but not carbohydrates (320.1±124.25 g vs. 324.9±124.46 g, p=0.496), compared to those in the inactive PA (n=323) and low HGS (n=113) groups (Table 2).

Comparison of nutritional intake according to aerobic physical activity and handgrip strength

The forest plot showed the ORs and their 95% CIs for nutritional intake in relation to aerobic PA and low HGS (Figure 3). For active aerobic PA, increases in the intake of food, water, calories, protein, and lipids are associated with a slightly higher likelihood of engaging in active aerobic PA, with ORs of (95% CI, 1.03 to 1.09). Moreover, for low HGS, higher intakes of food, water, calories, protein, and lipids are associated with a lower likelihood of having low HGS, with ORs <1 (95% CI, 0.82 to 0.96). Carbohydrate intake did not show a clear association with active aerobic PA or low HGS.

Fig. 3.

Forest plots illustrating the relationship between nutritional intake and physical activity (PA) and handgrip strength (HGS). (A) The association of nutritional intake with active aerobic PA), where odds ratios (ORs) above 1 indicate a positive correlation with increased activity levels. (B) The correlation of nutritional intake with low HGS, with ORs below 1 suggesting a negative association, meaning higher nutritional intake is associated with a lower incidence of low HGS. Each plot provides 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for a clearer statistical interpretation.

4. Correlation between HGS and nutritional component intake

Protein and caloric intake had strong positive correlations with HGS (correlation coefficients=0.344 and 0.346, respectively; p<0.001). These correlations were stronger compared to those with carbohydrate, lipid, and water intake, which had lower correlation coefficients of 0.242, 0.256, and 0.147, respectively (Table 3).

The correlation coefficient between handgrip strength and nutritional component intake

5. Factors associated with active aerobic PA and HGS

Multivariate logistic regression analyses did not show significant associations between total food intake, nutritional components, and active aerobic PA or HGS among the participants. However, increasing age and lower BMI were significantly associated with low HGS (OR, 0.898; 95% CI, 0.865 to 0.931; p<0.001 and OR, 1.093; 95% CI, 1.104 to 1.179; p=0.02, respectively) (Tables 4, 5).

Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses of factors associated with aerobic physical activity in individuals with airflow limitation

Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses of factors associated with handgrip strength in individuals with airflow limitation

Discussion

This study explored the association between nutritional intake, PA, and muscle strength, focusing on HGS in individuals with airflow limitation. Our findings indicate a potential link where increased nutritional intake correlates with enhanced PA and greater HGS, emphasizing the importance of dietary factors in managing and improving physical activities in this population.

While the study did not find significant differences in dietary intake among groups with varying levels of HGS, this outcome underscores the complexity of the factors influencing muscle strength, and the possible overshadowing impact of other variables, e.g., age, disease severity, and overall PA levels. These findings suggest that while diet is a crucial element of health, its direct impact on muscle strength may be interdependent with other lifestyle or physiological factors not fully isolated in this study.

In this study, protein intake emerged as a significant factor associated with PA in individuals with airflow limitation, including patients with COPD. Notably, higher protein intake has been reported to have a positive effect on PA, even in the general population. For example, inadequate protein intake in community-dwelling older adults aged 70 to 79 years was associated with an increased risk of PA limitation over a 6-year period [17]. Conversely, a higher protein intake demonstrated a dose-dependent protective effect on walking speed [18]. These findings further support the potential role of protein intake in promoting PA in patients with COPD [19]. Furthermore, protein intake has been found to be associated with muscle strength in the general population. Cross-sectional studies conducted in the United States revealed a positive association between total protein intake and parameters, e.g., leg lean muscle mass and quadriceps strength [20]. However, the relationship between protein intake and muscle strength in older adults remains inconclusive, with some studies reporting no association [21,22]. However, in the context of COPD, muscle protein breakdown contributes to muscle wasting. Nutritional support can play a vital role in counteracting this process and compensating for protein loss, leading to improved nutritional status and functional capacity in patients with COPD [8,23]. For example, oral dietary supplements containing high-quality protein enriched with leucine, administered as an adjunct to exercise training over 4 months, have shown improvements in quadriceps strength and cycle endurance compared to placebo, in patients with moderate to severe COPD [24]. These findings, along with the results of our study, suggest that protein intake may have a beneficial impact on PA levels and muscle strength in patients with COPD.

Sarcopenia is the loss of muscle mass and strength that occurs with aging. In patients with COPD, there is an increased risk of developing sarcopenia [25]. The reduced PA due to the respiratory symptoms of COPD can accelerate muscle loss. Additionally, COPD can lead to a state of chronic inflammation and nutritional deficiencies, both of which can contribute to muscle wasting. In 50 patients with COPD (65±7 years; FEV1 51%±14% predicted), strong correlations were found between HGS and muscle strength, particularly in the quadriceps, suggesting HGS as a reliable, simple measure to assess muscle strength in patients with COPD [10]. Our study demonstrated that increasing age and lower BMI are significantly associated with lower HGS. A Southeast Asian study investigating sarcopenia in 121 patients with COPD (mostly men) found that 24% of these patients had sarcopenia. The important factors associated with sarcopenia included age ≥75 years, more severe COPD, a higher Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale score, and obesity. The study concluded that sarcopenia is a significant issue in patients with COPD, with age, disease severity, and BMI as major associated factors [26]. Proper nutrition is essential for older and underweight individuals, as it is pivotal to maintaining muscle strength and overall functionality. This is particularly crucial for individuals with conditions such as COPD, where adequate nutrition can help preserve muscle mass and support better health outcomes.

This study had some limitations. First, the study design is cross-sectional, which limits the ability to establish causal relationships between nutritional intake, PA, and HGS. Longitudinal or interventional studies would be required to determine the directionality and causality of these associations. Second, the study population was comprised of individuals with airflow limitations from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to patients with COPD. Third, the study included only a small proportion of individuals with severe or moderate airflow limitation (defined as FEV1 ≤50%), and over 30% of the population comprised non-smokers with airflow limitation. Fourth, the study has the potential lack of novelty in the findings, as our results predominantly confirm well-established associations between low HGS and factors, e.g., older age and lower BMI. However, the confirmation of these relationships in our specific population contributes to these well-known associations, and underscores the importance of these factors in clinical assessments and interventions.

In conclusion, our study provides evidence supporting the relationship between nutritional intake, particularly protein intake, PA, and muscle strength in individuals with airflow limitation. These findings emphasize the importance of nutritional support in enhancing PA levels and muscle strength in this population. Future research should focus on identifying specific nutritional components and mechanisms that have the greatest impact on these parameters, enabling the development of targeted interventions to optimize functional outcomes in patients with COPD.

Notes

Authors’ Contributions

Conceptualization: Kim HC. Methodology: Kim HC. Formal analysis: Heo IR, Kim HC. Data curation: Heo IR, Kim HC. Software: Heo IR, Kim HC. Validation: Heo IR, Kim HC. Writing - original draft preparation: Heo IR, Kim HC. Writing - review and editing: Kim TH, Jeong JH, Heo M, Ju SM, Yoo JW, Lee SJ, Cho YJ, Jeong YY, Lee JD. Approval of final manuscript: all authors.

Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Funding

No funding to declare.

References

1. Agustí AG, Noguera A, Sauleda J, Sala E, Pons J, Busquets X. Systemic effects of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Eur Respir J 2003;21:347–60.
2. Sanders KJ, Kneppers AE, van de Bool C, Langen RC, Schols AM. Cachexia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: new insights and therapeutic perspective. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2016;7:5–22.
3. Vermeeren MA, Creutzberg EC, Schols AM, Postma DS, Pieters WR, Roldaan AC, et al. Prevalence of nutritional depletion in a large out-patient population of patients with COPD. Respir Med 2006;100:1349–55.
4. Rawal G, Yadav S. Nutrition in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review. J Transl Int Med 2015;3:151–4.
5. Remels AH, Gosker HR, Langen RC, Schols AM. The mechanisms of cachexia underlying muscle dysfunction in COPD. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2013;114:1253–62.
6. Wagner PD. Possible mechanisms underlying the development of cachexia in COPD. Eur Respir J 2008;31:492–501.
7. van Wetering CR, Hoogendoorn M, Broekhuizen R, Geraerts-Keeris GJ, De Munck DR, Rutten-van Molken MP, et al. Efficacy and costs of nutritional rehabilitation in muscle-wasted patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a community-based setting: a prespecified subgroup analysis of the INTERCOM trial. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2010;11:179–87.
8. Ferreira IM, Brooks D, White J, Goldstein R. Nutritional supplementation for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;12:CD000998.
9. Creutzberg EC, Wouters EF, Mostert R, Weling-Scheepers CA, Schols AM. Efficacy of nutritional supplementation therapy in depleted patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Nutrition 2003;19:120–7.
10. Fonseca J, Machado FV, Santin LC, Andrello AC, Schneider LP, Fernandes Belo L, et al. Handgrip strength as a reflection of general muscle strength in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. COPD 2021;18:299–306.
11. Miller MR, Hankinson J, Brusasco V, Burgos F, Casaburi R, Coates A, et al. Standardisation of spirometry. Eur Respir J 2005;26:319–38.
12. Vogelmeier CF, Criner GJ, Martinez FJ, Anzueto A, Barnes PJ, Bourbeau J, et al. Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive lung disease 2017 report: GOLD executive summary. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2017;195:557–82.
13. Karvetti RL, Knuts LR. Validity of the 24-hour dietary recall. J Am Diet Assoc 1985;85:1437–42.
14. Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003;35:1381–95.
15. Yoo JI, Choi H, Ha YC. Mean hand grip strength and cut-off value for sarcopenia in Korean adults using KNHANES VI. J Korean Med Sci 2017;32:868–72.
16. Barbeau EM, Krieger N, Soobader MJ. Working class matters: socioeconomic disadvantage, race/ethnicity, gender, and smoking in NHIS 2000. Am J Public Health 2004;94:269–78.
17. Houston DK, Tooze JA, Garcia K, Visser M, Rubin S, Harris TB, et al. Protein intake and mobility limitation in community-dwelling older adults: the Health ABC Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2017;65:1705–11.
18. Mendonca N, Hengeveld LM, Visser M, Presse N, Canhao H, Simonsick EM, et al. Low protein intake, physical activity, and physical function in European and North American community-dwelling older adults: a pooled analysis of four longitudinal aging cohorts. Am J Clin Nutr 2021;114:29–41.
19. Holst M, Beck AM, Rasmussen HH, Lange P. Insufficient intake of energy and protein is related to physical functional capacity among COPD patients referred to municipality based pulmonary rehabilitation. Clin Nutr ESPEN 2019;30:35–41.
20. Sahni S, Mangano KM, Hannan MT, Kiel DP, McLean RR. Higher protein intake is associated with higher lean mass and quadriceps muscle strength in adult men and women. J Nutr 2015;145:1569–75.
21. Scott D, Blizzard L, Fell J, Giles G, Jones G. Associations between dietary nutrient intake and muscle mass and strength in community-dwelling older adults: the Tasmanian Older Adult Cohort Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2010;58:2129–34.
22. Mulla UZ, Cooper R, Mishra GD, Kuh D, Stephen AM. Adult macronutrient intake and physical capability in the MRC National Survey of Health and Development. Age Ageing 2013;42:81–7.
23. Collins PF, Yang IA, Chang YC, Vaughan A. Nutritional support in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): an evidence update. J Thorac Dis 2019;11(Suppl 17):S2230–7.
24. van de Bool C, Rutten EP, van Helvoort A, Franssen FM, Wouters EF, Schols AM. A randomized clinical trial investigating the efficacy of targeted nutrition as adjunct to exercise training in COPD. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2017;8:748–58.
25. Benz E, Trajanoska K, Lahousse L, Schoufour JD, Terzikhan N, De Roos E, et al. Sarcopenia in COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Respir Rev 2019;28:190049.
26. Limpawattana P, Inthasuwan P, Putraveephong S, Boonsawat W, Theerakulpisut D, Sawanyawisuth K. Sarcopenia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a study of prevalence and associated factors in the Southeast Asian population. Chron Respir Dis 2018;15:250–7.

Article information Continued

Fig. 1.

Flow diagram for study population I. The flow diagram showed from 15,700 participants to 622 individuals with airflow limitation by excluding those under 40 years, without spirometry, with normal forced expiratory volume per 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratios, or lacking key measurements. The categorization of the enrolled 622 participants with airflow limitation, divided into subgroups based on their aerobic physical activity (PA) and handgrip strength (HGS).

Fig. 2.

Flow diagram for study population II. The categorization of the enrolled 622 participants with airflow limitation, divided into subgroups based on their aerobic physical activity (PA) and handgrip strength (HGS).

Fig. 3.

Forest plots illustrating the relationship between nutritional intake and physical activity (PA) and handgrip strength (HGS). (A) The association of nutritional intake with active aerobic PA), where odds ratios (ORs) above 1 indicate a positive correlation with increased activity levels. (B) The correlation of nutritional intake with low HGS, with ORs below 1 suggesting a negative association, meaning higher nutritional intake is associated with a lower incidence of low HGS. Each plot provides 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for a clearer statistical interpretation.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of the participants

Characteristic Total subjects Active aerobic PA
Low HGS
Yes (n=299) No (n=323) p-value Yes (n=113) No (n=509) p-value
Age, yr 66.8±9.19 65.9±9.15 67.7±9.16 0.013 72.8±6.73 65.5±9.24 0.000
Male sex 456 (73.3) 232 (77.6) 224 (69.3) 0.023 87 (70.2) 369 (72.5) 0.328
BMI, kg/m2 23.8±2.99 23.6±2.76 24.0±3.19 0.065 23.2±2.99 24.0±2.98 0.015
Current smoker 158 (25.4) 76 (25.5) 81 (25.5) 0.993 20 (17.6) 138 (25.5) 0.114
Alcohol ingestion (n=616) 332 (53.4) 176 (53.0) 156 (47.0) 0.013 42 (37.8) 290 (57.4) 0.000
Pulmonary function test
 FEV1, L 2.2±0.62 2.3±0.60 2.1±0.63 0.001 1.94±0.50 2.27±0.63 0.000
 FEV1, % predicted 77.9±16.17 77.9±15.99 77.9±16.36 0.972 77.2±17.20 78.0±15.94 0.621
 FEV1/FVC, % 62.9±6.73 62.7±6.90 63.0±6.49 0.502 61.6±6.97 63.1±6.65 0.030
 GOLD stage III/IV 32 (5.1) 16 (5.4) 16 (5.0) 0.499 7 (6.2) 25 (4.9) 0.186
Underlying disease
 Hypertension 273 (43.9) 126 (42.1) 147 (45.5) 0.372 56 (49.6) 217 (42.6) 0.007
 Diabetes 102 (16.4) 42 (14.0) 60 (18.6) 0.192 15 (13.3) 87 (17.1) 0.543
 Arthritis 93 (15.0) 46 (15.4) 48 (14.6) 0.590 21 (18.6) 72 (14.1) 0.433
 Ischemic heart disease 29 (4.7) 10 (3.3) 19 (5.9) 0.055 6 (5.3) 23 (4.5) 0.603
 Stroke 16 (2.5) 7 (2.3) 9 (2.8) 0.851 1 (0.9) 15 (2.9) 0.437
Pulmonary TB history 62 (10) 27 (9.0) 35 (10.8) 0.453 14 (12.4) 48 (9.4) 0.342
Laboratory Finding (n=596)
 Glucose, mg/dL 105.9±23.89 105.1±21.51 106.7±25.90 0.415 103.3±20.27 106.5±24.60 0.213
 Cholesterol (total), mg/dL 185.4±36.00 187.6±36.78 183.5±35.22 0.171 186.1±42.00 185.1±34.58 0.694
 Hb, g/dL 14.3±1.42 14.5±1.32 14.1±1.49 0.008 14.20±1.45 14.3±1.41 0.292
 BUN, mg/dL 16.2±4.55 15.9±4.49 16.5±4.59 0.675 16.1±4.26 17.1±5.62 0.070
 Creatinine, mg/dL 0.91±0.21 0.91±0.22 0.90±0.21 0.092 0.93±0.27 0.90±0.20 0.311
Weight loss over a year 85 (13.1) 41 (13.7) 42 (13.0) 0.785 18 (15.9) 65 (12.8) 0.492
EQ-5D index 0.92±0.12 0.94±0.09 0.91±0.13 0.001 0.93±0.10 0.88±0.16 0.002
PHQ-9 score (n=615) 2.15±3.49 2.15±3.53 2.15±3.45 0.997 2.09±3.42 2.56±3.95 0.360
Physical activity
 Activity limitation 61 (9.8) 24 (8.0) 37 (11.5) 0.151 17 (15.0) 44 (8.6) 0.039
 Vigorous activity in the workplace 12 (1.9) 11 (3.7) 1 (0.3) 0.002 0 12 (2.4) 0.137
 Moderate activity in the workplace 53 (8.5) 47 (15.7) 6 (1.9) 0.000 8 (7.1) 45 (8.8) 0.729
 Vigorous activity for leisure 52 (8.4) 47 (15.7) 5 (1.5) 0.000 1 (0.9) 51 (10.0) 0.000
 Moderate activity for leisure 133 (21.4) 116 (38.8) 17 (5.3) 0.000 11 (9.7) 122 (24.0) 0.001
 Aerobic physical activity in a week 299 (48.1) - - - 40 (35.4) 259 (50.9) 0.003
HGS (sum of right and left), kg 61.61±17.09 64.76±16.05 58.7±17.53 0.000 45.1±11.97 65.28±15.86 0.000
HGS (dominant hand), kg 31.4±8.99 33.1±8.4 29.8±9.1 0.000 22.3±5.8 33.4±8.28 0.000
HGS/BMI 2.60±0.73 2.76±0.69 2.46±0.74 0.000 1.96±0.56 2.74±0.69 0.000
Low HGS (<28.6 in men, <16.4 kg in women) 113 (18.2) 40 (13.4) 73 (22.6) 0.003 - - -

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%).

PA: physical activity; HGS: handgrip strength; BMI: body mass index; FEV1: forced expiratory volume per 1 second; FVC: forced vital capacity; GOLD: Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease; TB: tuberculosis; Hb: hemoglobin; BUN: blood urea nitrogen; EQ-5D: EuroQol Five-Dimension Questionnaire; PHQ: Patient Health Questionnaire.

Table 2.

Comparison of nutritional intake according to aerobic physical activity and handgrip strength

Variable Total subjects Active aerobic PA
Low HGS
Yes (n=299) No (n=323) p-value Yes (n=113) No (n=509) p-value
Food total, g 1,501.9±749.93 1,576.9±732.83 1,432.5±759.96 0.016 1,253.3±686.5 1,557.1±752.4 0.000
Water, g 1,051.0±649.72 1,112.7±634.11 993.8±659.68 0.022 833.5±580.8 1,092.3±654.8 0.000
Calories, kcal 1,953.1±753.84 2,026.8±769.09 1,884.9±734.06 0.019 1,793.3±795.4 1,988.6±740.4 0.018
Protein, g 64.7±31.67 68.6±31.43 61.2±31.51 0.003 54.2±29.4 67.14±31.69 0.000
Lipid, g 34.6±27.01 37.7±27.85 31.6±25.92 0.005 26.23±30.69 36.4±25.95 0.001
Carbohydrate, g 320.1±124.25 324.9±124.46 318.2±122.81 0.496 317.8±138.5 322.2±120.0 0.729

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.

PA: physical activity; HGS: handgrip strength.

Table 3.

The correlation coefficient between handgrip strength and nutritional component intake

Variable of nutritional intake HGS, dominant hand
Pearson’s correlation coefficient p-value
Food total, g 0.280 0.001
Water, g 0.147 0.001
Calories, kcal 0.344 0.001
Protein, g 0.346 0.001
Lipid, g 0.258 0.001
Carbohydrate, g 0.234 0.001

HGS: handgrip strength.

Table 4.

Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses of factors associated with aerobic physical activity in individuals with airflow limitation

Variable Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis
OR 95% CI p-value OR 95% CI p-value
Age 0.978 0.962–0.995 0.013 0.999 0.969–1.011 0.363
Male sex 1.530 1.067–2.194 0.021 1.067 0.641–1.778 0.803
BMI, kg/m2 0.951 0.902–1.003 0.066
Alcohol ingestion 1.498 1.089–2.061 0.013 1.099 0.763–1.584 1.099
Current smoking 1.002 0.697–1.439 0.993
FEV1, L 1.517 1.172–1.964 0.002 1.268 0.910–1.767 0.161
FVC, L 1.400 1.066–1.682 0.000
Hemoglobin, g/dL 1.168 1.041–1.311 0.008 1.098 0.954–1.264 0.193
Hematocrit 1.043 1.001–1.087 0.046
Food intake total, g 1.000 1.000–1.000 0.017 1.000 1.000–1.000 0.392
Water intake, g 1.000 1.000–1.001 0.024 1.000 1.000–1.000 0.392
Protein intake, g 1.008 1.002–1.013 0.004 1.001 0.994–1.009 0.784
Lipid intake, g 1.009 1.002–1.015 0.006 1.004 0.995–1.013 0.382
Cholesterol intake, g 1.001 1.000–1.002 0.023
Carbohydrate intake, g 1.000 0.999–1.002 0.495

OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; BMI: body mass index; FEV1: forced expiratory volume per 1 second; FVC: forced vital capacity.

Table 5.

Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses of factors associated with handgrip strength in individuals with airflow limitation

Variable Univariate analysis
Multivariate analysis
OR 95% CI p-value OR 95% CI p-value
Age 0.881 0.851–0.912 0.000 0.898 0.865–0.931 0.001
Male sex 0.788 0.488–1.272 0.329
BMI, kg/m2 1.094 1.017–1.176 0.015 1.093 1.014–1.179 0.020
Alcohol ingestion 2.216 1.453–3.380 0.000 1.093 1.014–1.179 0.250
FEV1, L 2.474 1.737–3.519 0.000 1.268 0.910–1.767 0.084
FVC, L 1.812 1.419–2.313 0.000
Activity limitation 1.871 1.026–3.414 0.041 1.554 0.801–3.015 0.192
Food intake total, g 1.001 1.000–1.001 0.000 0.998 0.996–1.000 0.068
Water intake, g 1.001 1.000–1.001 0.024 1.000 1.000–1.001 0.366
Protein intake, g 1.016 1.008–1.024 0.000 1.001 0.988–1.015 0.987
Lipid intake, g 1.021 1.009–1.032 0.000 1.004 0.990–1.019 0.568

OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; BMI: body mass index; FEV1: forced expiratory volume per 1 second; FVC: forced vital capacity.