Comparison of four quick and reliable methods of assessing body fat appropriate for clinical settings among young, middle-age, and older healthy male and female adults.
Rafael F Escamilla, Kyle Yamashiro, Robert Asuncion, Daniel MacLean, Irwin Scott Thompson, Michael McKeough
{"title":"Comparison of four quick and reliable methods of assessing body fat appropriate for clinical settings among young, middle-age, and older healthy male and female adults.","authors":"Rafael F Escamilla, Kyle Yamashiro, Robert Asuncion, Daniel MacLean, Irwin Scott Thompson, Michael McKeough","doi":"10.1589/jpts.36.518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>[Purpose] Compare four quick (approximately 60 s), reliable methods of assessing %body-fat (%BF) among young (Y, 18-34 years), middle-age (M, 35-59 years), and older (O, 60-88 years) healthy-adults. [Participants and Methods] One-hundred-eighty healthy males-and-females were equally (n=30) divided into Y, M, and O age groups to assess %BF. The %BF methods were: 1) Bioelectrical-impedance-Inbody770 (IB)-criterion reference; 2) Body-mass-index (BMI); 3) Abdominal-and-hip circumferences (CIR); and 4) Skinfold (SF). [Results] %BF were significantly different among the four body-fat methods and among the three age-groups for both males-and-females. %BF among IB,BMI,CIR, and SF were, respectively, 15.7 ± 4.7%, 19.6 ± 3.2%, 17.3 ± 3.5%, and 12.1 ± 4.1% for Y-males; 18.3 ± 5.7%, 22.8 ± 3.6%, 19.6 ± 3.6%, and 15.6 ± 4.5% for M-males; 24.4 ± 6.5%, 25.8 ± 3.3%, 24.0 ± 4.5%, and 20.0 ± 4.1% for O-males; 24.9 ± 6.9%, 28.9 ± 4.1%, 29.4 ± 4.6%, and 22.4 ± 6.3% for Y-females; 25.1 ± 7.0%, 31.4 ± 4.7%, 33.0 ± 4.5%, and 25.0 ± 4.5% for M-females; 35.1 ± 6.3%, 35.5 ± 4.3%, 38.4 ± 4.8%, and 26.4 ± 3.7% for O-females. [Conclusion]The most accurate %BF-methods to use in clinical settings are CIR for Y-and-M-males, CIR and BMI for O-males, SF for Y-and M-females, and BMI for O-females. The least accurate %BF methods are BMI and SF for Y-males, BMI for M-males, SF for O-males, BMI and CIR for Y-and M-females, and SF for O-females. While all 4-methods of assessing %BF can easily and quickly be employed in clinical settings, some methods significantly underestimate or overestimate %BF and yield different results among varying age groups and sex. These findings help identify people at early health risk of cardiometabolic disease, with O-males and O-females at higher risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":16834,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physical Therapy Science","volume":"36 9","pages":"518-525"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11374165/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physical Therapy Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.36.518","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
[Purpose] Compare four quick (approximately 60 s), reliable methods of assessing %body-fat (%BF) among young (Y, 18-34 years), middle-age (M, 35-59 years), and older (O, 60-88 years) healthy-adults. [Participants and Methods] One-hundred-eighty healthy males-and-females were equally (n=30) divided into Y, M, and O age groups to assess %BF. The %BF methods were: 1) Bioelectrical-impedance-Inbody770 (IB)-criterion reference; 2) Body-mass-index (BMI); 3) Abdominal-and-hip circumferences (CIR); and 4) Skinfold (SF). [Results] %BF were significantly different among the four body-fat methods and among the three age-groups for both males-and-females. %BF among IB,BMI,CIR, and SF were, respectively, 15.7 ± 4.7%, 19.6 ± 3.2%, 17.3 ± 3.5%, and 12.1 ± 4.1% for Y-males; 18.3 ± 5.7%, 22.8 ± 3.6%, 19.6 ± 3.6%, and 15.6 ± 4.5% for M-males; 24.4 ± 6.5%, 25.8 ± 3.3%, 24.0 ± 4.5%, and 20.0 ± 4.1% for O-males; 24.9 ± 6.9%, 28.9 ± 4.1%, 29.4 ± 4.6%, and 22.4 ± 6.3% for Y-females; 25.1 ± 7.0%, 31.4 ± 4.7%, 33.0 ± 4.5%, and 25.0 ± 4.5% for M-females; 35.1 ± 6.3%, 35.5 ± 4.3%, 38.4 ± 4.8%, and 26.4 ± 3.7% for O-females. [Conclusion]The most accurate %BF-methods to use in clinical settings are CIR for Y-and-M-males, CIR and BMI for O-males, SF for Y-and M-females, and BMI for O-females. The least accurate %BF methods are BMI and SF for Y-males, BMI for M-males, SF for O-males, BMI and CIR for Y-and M-females, and SF for O-females. While all 4-methods of assessing %BF can easily and quickly be employed in clinical settings, some methods significantly underestimate or overestimate %BF and yield different results among varying age groups and sex. These findings help identify people at early health risk of cardiometabolic disease, with O-males and O-females at higher risk.