用生物电阻抗分析和皮褶厚度估算体脂:巴西南部一项基于人群的研究。

Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) Pub Date : 2025-03-17 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1806-9282.20240406
Clovis Arlindo de Sousa, Bruna de Macedo, Luciane Coutinho de Azevedo, Nagila Raquel Teixeira Damasceno, Till Ittermann, Henry Völzke, Marcello Ricardo Paulista Markus, Ernani Tiaraju de Santa Helena
{"title":"用生物电阻抗分析和皮褶厚度估算体脂:巴西南部一项基于人群的研究。","authors":"Clovis Arlindo de Sousa, Bruna de Macedo, Luciane Coutinho de Azevedo, Nagila Raquel Teixeira Damasceno, Till Ittermann, Henry Völzke, Marcello Ricardo Paulista Markus, Ernani Tiaraju de Santa Helena","doi":"10.1590/1806-9282.20240406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to compare bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold measurements for the estimation of body fat in adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed data from 292 adult participants enrolled in a cross-sectional population-based study. Four skinfold measurements were performed, and body fat percentage was estimated using the Petroski formula. Bioelectrical impedance analysis was performed using a tetrapolar electrical bioimpedance device. The measurements were compared using Student's t-test, Robinson's coefficient of agreement, Cronbach's alpha, and linear regression models (slope and intercept).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean percentage of body fat estimated by skinfold measurements was higher compared to bioelectrical impedance analysis (29.0 vs. 27.9; p<0.001), but the agreement between the methods is good (alpha=0.88; Robinson's coefficient of agreement=0.91). Linear regression models showed a good correlation (r2=0.69). Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of -1.02 (-1.54 vs. -0.50) between the two techniques. The agreement was better in women, those aged 20-39 years, those with a body mass index<25, and those with a waist-to-height ratio<50.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The two methods showed a good agreement between the mean values of body fat percentage and can be used in population studies. However, their results should be considered with caution in men, people aged 40 years and older, overweight people, and those with a waist-to-height ratio≥50.</p>","PeriodicalId":94194,"journal":{"name":"Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)","volume":"71 1","pages":"e20240406"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11918830/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold thickness for the estimation of body fat: a population-based study in southern Brazil.\",\"authors\":\"Clovis Arlindo de Sousa, Bruna de Macedo, Luciane Coutinho de Azevedo, Nagila Raquel Teixeira Damasceno, Till Ittermann, Henry Völzke, Marcello Ricardo Paulista Markus, Ernani Tiaraju de Santa Helena\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1806-9282.20240406\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to compare bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold measurements for the estimation of body fat in adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed data from 292 adult participants enrolled in a cross-sectional population-based study. Four skinfold measurements were performed, and body fat percentage was estimated using the Petroski formula. Bioelectrical impedance analysis was performed using a tetrapolar electrical bioimpedance device. The measurements were compared using Student's t-test, Robinson's coefficient of agreement, Cronbach's alpha, and linear regression models (slope and intercept).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean percentage of body fat estimated by skinfold measurements was higher compared to bioelectrical impedance analysis (29.0 vs. 27.9; p<0.001), but the agreement between the methods is good (alpha=0.88; Robinson's coefficient of agreement=0.91). Linear regression models showed a good correlation (r2=0.69). Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of -1.02 (-1.54 vs. -0.50) between the two techniques. The agreement was better in women, those aged 20-39 years, those with a body mass index<25, and those with a waist-to-height ratio<50.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The two methods showed a good agreement between the mean values of body fat percentage and can be used in population studies. However, their results should be considered with caution in men, people aged 40 years and older, overweight people, and those with a waist-to-height ratio≥50.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)\",\"volume\":\"71 1\",\"pages\":\"e20240406\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11918830/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20240406\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20240406","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是比较生物电阻抗分析和皮褶测量在估计成人体脂方面的作用。方法:我们分析了一项基于横断面人群的研究中292名成人参与者的数据。进行了四次皮褶测量,并使用彼得斯基公式估计体脂率。采用四极生物阻抗仪进行生物阻抗分析。采用学生t检验、罗宾逊一致系数、Cronbach’s alpha和线性回归模型(斜率和截距)对测量结果进行比较。结果:与生物电阻抗分析相比,通过皮褶测量估计的体脂平均百分比更高(29.0比27.9;结论:两种方法体脂率均值吻合较好,可用于人群研究。然而,对于男性、40岁及以上人群、超重人群和腰高比≥50的人群,应谨慎考虑他们的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold thickness for the estimation of body fat: a population-based study in southern Brazil.

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold measurements for the estimation of body fat in adults.

Methods: We analyzed data from 292 adult participants enrolled in a cross-sectional population-based study. Four skinfold measurements were performed, and body fat percentage was estimated using the Petroski formula. Bioelectrical impedance analysis was performed using a tetrapolar electrical bioimpedance device. The measurements were compared using Student's t-test, Robinson's coefficient of agreement, Cronbach's alpha, and linear regression models (slope and intercept).

Results: The mean percentage of body fat estimated by skinfold measurements was higher compared to bioelectrical impedance analysis (29.0 vs. 27.9; p<0.001), but the agreement between the methods is good (alpha=0.88; Robinson's coefficient of agreement=0.91). Linear regression models showed a good correlation (r2=0.69). Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of -1.02 (-1.54 vs. -0.50) between the two techniques. The agreement was better in women, those aged 20-39 years, those with a body mass index<25, and those with a waist-to-height ratio<50.

Conclusion: The two methods showed a good agreement between the mean values of body fat percentage and can be used in population studies. However, their results should be considered with caution in men, people aged 40 years and older, overweight people, and those with a waist-to-height ratio≥50.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信