A total of 572 articles were identified in the electronic databases shown in Fig. 1. We excluded 533 articles because muscle strength and power data were not described, participants had muscular or genetic disorders, the focus of the study was different, or it was published in languages other than English or Spanish. Fifty-one articles were selected by title and abstract; 11 were eliminated due to being duplicated in the electronic databases consulted. Subsequently, the remaining 40 were reviewed entirely, resulting in the exclusion of 21 since the focus of the study was different and needed to describe the variables of interest; the other nine were excluded from the 19 remaining articles due to not describing evaluation methods or studying participants with a different approach. Subsequently, ten articles were selected. Therefore, we performed an intra-article review of the ten remaining articles and identified eight more articles; however, six were eliminated due to low quality (JB checklist) and the other one because of a lack of quantitative data. Finally, 11 articles were included in this work. (Fig. 1) The Kappa coefficient was calculated to assess the agreement between the raters, whose value was 0.82 (p ≤ 0.001) with a percentage agreement of 92%. Searching was replicated in February 2023, and we identified four articles by title, which were excluded due to the reasons discussed previously.
The 11 included articles were carried out between 2003 and 2023, with a total of 13,451 participants, of which seven were conducted in Europe;[23–28] two in America;[29, 30] one in Oceania;[31] and one in Asia,[32] Table 2. The sample size varied from 55 to 3206, with children and adolescents from 6 to 18 years of age. Only in two studies did the female sex predominate; [29, 32] however, most children and adolescents with obesity or overweight were male. (Table 2)
3.1. Muscle strength
The handgrip strength was higher in children and adolescents with overweight or obesity than in normal weight, especially in males.[24, 29, 32] Contrary, when upper limb strength was assessed in patients with overweight or obesity through a load of their weight (Bent arm hang test), the results were significantly lower compared to normal-weight patients, predominantly male. [23, 25] Similarly, in five articles, upper limb strength was assessed through pull-ups[29, 31]and push-up tests,[23, 30, 31] finding lower performance in the group with obesity.
Furthermore, the maximal strength of the knee extensor muscles was also higher in males with obesity participants than in normal weight.[29] In this regard, Deforche B. et al., 2003, Tokmakidis S. et al., 2006; Karppanen A K. et al., 2012; and Castro-Piñero J. et al., 2009 found a lower number of sit-ups in the obesity group compared to those of normal weight or non-obese group, as viewed in Table 3.[23–25, 28] In addition, one study [31] evaluated lower limb strength through the rising from a chair test, finding that participants with obesity were slower to get up from the chair than their counterparts. Moreover, Nunez-Gaunaurd N. et al., 2013, used timed tests for going up and down stairs, the Timed-Sit-to-Stand test and the Timed Up and Down Stairs test group with obesity as an indicator for lower limb strength, finding lower results in children with obesity compared to the group of participants with normal weight (OB: 1.8 ± 0.52; NW: 2.02 ± 0.52). [30] Lastly, Lazzer S. et al., 2009 reported that the peak force of the lower limbs measured through the Explosive Ergometer was higher in participants with obesity compared with their counterparts non-obese showing a significant difference between male and female participants (boys: OB 975.8 ± 20.6; non-OB 867.4 ± 21.3; girls: OB 927.8 ± 21.8; non-OB 689.5 ± 25.1) [27, 33] Table 3.
Some studies evaluated abdominal muscle strength, finding that the strength measured through plank and abdominal exercises was lower in the participants with obesity compared to those with normal weight and even those with overweight in both sexes, predominantly female.[23, 29]
3.2 Muscle power
Muscle power of the upper limbs was consistently higher in participants in the group with obesity [23, 26, 27, 31], especially in male participants. Only one study reported an increase in older age participants.[26]
On the other hand, we found reduced muscle power in the lower limbs in the group with obesity compared to children and adolescents with normal weight, higher in male participants compared to females (Table 4). [23–28, 31, 32] Only one study demonstrated greater muscle power in the lower limbs of the group of participants with obesity compared to overweight and normal weight with a predominance of males.[33]
3.3 Assessment tests or instruments
3.3.1 Muscle strength tests and Instruments
The most widely used measurement instrument for the evaluation of upper limb muscle strength was the hand dynamometer [24, 26, 29, 32] of different types (digital and mechanical), followed by indirect tests such as plank, pull-ups, or push-ups [29–31], and Bent arm hang as part of the EURO FIT battery[24, 25] or alone.[23] Abdominal muscle strength was assessed through abdominal curls[30] and sit-ups.[23–25, 28] For the evaluation of the strength of the lower limb muscles, the test used was the Explosive-Ergometer, (EXER, University of Udine, Udine, Italy), which assessed absolute peak strength of both limbs[26] and indirect tests such as rising from a chair test[31] the knee extension test[29] and Timed Sit-to-Stand test, and the Timed Up and Down Stair test (Table 3).[30]
3.3.2 Muscle power test and Instruments
The most used test to evaluate upper limb muscle power were the basketball throw, throwback ball, and forward throw tests.[23, 26, 27, 31] On the other hand, lower limb muscle power was primarily evaluated by jump tests, such as vertical jump, squat jump, standing broad jump, and long jump.[23, 25–28, 31] One study used a direct instrument, the Explosive Ergometer (EXER, University of Udine, Udine, Italy), to measure the absolute peak force of the lower extremities, an indicator of lower limb power. (Table 4) [33]
3.3.3. Quality of the evidence
The reporting methodological quality of the studies included showed a high risk of bias due to poor description of the measures taken to address the sample adequately, how the sample size was calculated, the strategies for performing the sampling, and whether the measurements were made through standardised and reliable instruments in all participants. (Table 1)