This paper provides sex- and age-specific normative values for handgrip strength and components of the Senior Fitness Test. The test results of all physical fitness measurements differed between woman and men, yet the age-specific decline was similar for both.
The sex differences with men performing higher in endurance and muscle strength domains as well as the superiority of women in the flexibility domains are in line with other studies [
9‐
14,
16,
28‐
31]. This also applies to the age-specific decline in test results [
9‐
16,
28‐
31]. Yet, specific values differ between studies. The normative values for handgrip strength provided in this paper are overall higher than other published values [
14,
28‐
31]. Handgrip strength is positively correlated to body height [
28,
32,
33]. This could be one reason for the differences as the participants in our study were considerably taller. In the 30s-chair stand test and the 2 min-step test, our normative values for both women and men are lower than most of the other values reported [
9‐
11,
13‐
16]. One possible explanation could be the differences in body weight. Only some studies reported the body weight of their participants, but in most studies that did, the participants weighted less than ours [
9,
11,
14,
15]. For the 2 min-step test, only Chung et al. reported lower values [
14]. Chen et al. provided similar normative values for the 30s-chair stand test [
10]. There is indication that flexibility is dependent on culture [
34]. For example, older adults in Hong Kong like to engage in “light Chinese-style mind-body exercise” with a focus on flexibility [
14]. The normative values for Hong Kong for both, the sit-and-reach test and the back scratch test, are higher than ours [
14]. This is also the case for the normative values of the sit-and-reach test for an older Taiwanese population [
10]. Older men from Poland reached higher values in both flexibility tests while the values from older Polish women are similar to ours [
16]. Apart from older men in one Spanish study [
12], normative values from Spain and Portugal are lower for both flexibility tests [
11‐
13]. Chilean women reached similar values in the sit-and-reach test and lower values in the back scratch test [
15]. For the USA, Rikli & Jones reported a narrower range of values with higher values in the lower percentiles and lower values in the higher percentiles for the sit-and-reach test and overall higher values for the back scratch test [
9].
The representativeness of the study sample for the older German population must be considered with caution. In comparison to national census data of 60–69-year-olds in 2011 [
35] the study sample was better educated (22.0% (census 2011) vs. 31.6% (OUTDOOR ACTIVE) with Abitur (German equivalent to a high school diploma). Since there is a positive association between education and physical fitness [
36], this could lead to an overestimation of normative values. All participants lived in Bremen, a city in the northwest of Germany. According to previously published studies, health-related behaviour e.g. physical activity differs between urban and rural areas [
37,
38], however, there is yet no clear picture in which direction. Moreover, the included sub-districts in Bremen are highly heterogeneous. This is also reflected in the land use mix. Proportions of agricultural land use of the included sub-districts range from 0% (Neustadt and Ostertor) to 59.8% (Arbergen), thus a range of diverse areas is covered in the sample. Although disparities are slowly diminishing in the third decade after German reunification, prevalence of overweight and obesity still differs systematically between East and West Germany [
39], and also body height is geographically patterned in Germany [
40]. This might lead to overestimation of handgrip normative values and underestimation of chair stand normative values for Germany. In our study, we excluded institutionalized persons. In the age group 65 to 75 years, only a small proportion (1.11%) is in residential care [
41], therefore, the normative values are probably not seriously impacted by this limitation. The OUTDOOR ACTIVE participants were able to participate in the study without taking part in the physical fitness tests. Participants of the physical fitness test were less likely to report only medium or poor subjective health compared to the other 433 survey participants (14.9% versus 26.3%) and less likely to be under constant medication (72.9% versus 76.7%) leading to a probable overestimation of normative values. This is a well-known limitation also in other studies [
42]. One particular strength of the study is the use of the GAMLSS method, which gives normative values for each year of life and not only age groups.