Document resource
It is well known that muscular strength is a marker of future health, but it is unclear which simple field-based muscular strength tests provide the strongest prognostic value for long-term health conditions. A recent meta-analysis focused on adults (aged 18–64 years) and older adults (aged ≥65 years) published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine 1 concluded that the handgrip strength test is the most studied in prospective cohort studies (n=145) and has a strong prognostic value of multiple health outcomes. However, it has been argued that the handgrip strength test might have a low responsiveness to usual resistance training interventions involving major muscle groups,2 3 limiting its sensitivity to detect changes in muscular strength and therefore its usefulness in research, clinical or sport-oriented interventions. The same meta-analysis also identified the second most used test in prospective studies (n=36), the sit-to-stand test (STS). Interestingly, the STS was found to be highly predictive of multiple health conditions, including a lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus, musculoskeletal impairment, disability, depression and dementia. In this editorial, we discuss the different versions of the STS, their measurement properties (reliability, validity and responsiveness) and future perspectives.