Class
Article
College
Emma Eccles Jones College of Education and Human Services
Department
Kinesiology & Health Sciences
Faculty Mentor
Dale Wagner
Presentation Type
Poster Presentation
Abstract
Body fat percentage (%BF) can be estimated from subcutaneous fat thickness measured by ultrasound (US). %BFUS has been compared to %BF estimates from laboratory devices such as dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and the Bod Pod; however, comparison to a four-compartment (4C) “gold standard” is lacking. PURPOSE: This study compared the accuracy of %BFUS to %BF4C. METHODS: University club sport athletes (84 women, 138 men) participated. Bod Pod, DXA, and bioimpedance spectroscopy were used to measure body volume, bone mineral content, and total body water, respectively, for the 4C model. A-mode US measures were taken at 3 sites to estimate %BFUS. All measurements were taken in a single session. Comparisons between %BFUS and %BF4C were evaluated with Pearson correlation, a paired t-test, and linear regression. Individual errors and bias were evaluated with Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: %BF4C ranged from 15.5% to 42.8% in women and 4.9% to 35.7% in men. %BFUS and %BF4C were highly correlated for the total sample (r = 0.926) as well as for men (r = 0.876) and women (r = 0.849). Mean difference or constant error (CE) in %BF was ~1% BF with standard error of estimate (SEE) ~3% BF. Individual errors suggest a slight bias (r = -0.250) for %BFUS to be overestimated in lean women and underestimated in fat women, and there is a tendency for heteroscedasticity in men. CONCLUSION: In general, the %BFUS errors are low and bias is small, suggesting that A-mode ultrasound is a valid field measure of %BF for young adult athletes. Accuracy appears to be better in men than women.
Location
Logan, UT
Start Date
4-11-2023 12:30 PM
End Date
4-11-2023 1:30 PM
Included in
Validity of Ultrasound in Estimating Body Fat Percentage Compared to 4-Compartment Model
Logan, UT
Body fat percentage (%BF) can be estimated from subcutaneous fat thickness measured by ultrasound (US). %BFUS has been compared to %BF estimates from laboratory devices such as dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and the Bod Pod; however, comparison to a four-compartment (4C) “gold standard” is lacking. PURPOSE: This study compared the accuracy of %BFUS to %BF4C. METHODS: University club sport athletes (84 women, 138 men) participated. Bod Pod, DXA, and bioimpedance spectroscopy were used to measure body volume, bone mineral content, and total body water, respectively, for the 4C model. A-mode US measures were taken at 3 sites to estimate %BFUS. All measurements were taken in a single session. Comparisons between %BFUS and %BF4C were evaluated with Pearson correlation, a paired t-test, and linear regression. Individual errors and bias were evaluated with Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: %BF4C ranged from 15.5% to 42.8% in women and 4.9% to 35.7% in men. %BFUS and %BF4C were highly correlated for the total sample (r = 0.926) as well as for men (r = 0.876) and women (r = 0.849). Mean difference or constant error (CE) in %BF was ~1% BF with standard error of estimate (SEE) ~3% BF. Individual errors suggest a slight bias (r = -0.250) for %BFUS to be overestimated in lean women and underestimated in fat women, and there is a tendency for heteroscedasticity in men. CONCLUSION: In general, the %BFUS errors are low and bias is small, suggesting that A-mode ultrasound is a valid field measure of %BF for young adult athletes. Accuracy appears to be better in men than women.