Anthropometric measures of obesity in patients with knee joint pathology: Body surface area versus body mass index.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Obesity is quantified using body mass index. Body surface area may provide a superior and more anthropometric method of quantifying obesity in patients with musculoskeletal knee disease. This study compares the effect of weight, height, age and gender on body mass index and body surface area in a population with orthopaedic knee disease. METHODS An observational cohort study was conducted of patients presenting with musculoskeletal knee disease. Associations between body mass index, body surface area, age, gender, height, weight and operative versus non-operative management were analysed. RESULTS A total of 151 patients were included. Body surface area was more strongly correlated to weight than body mass index (r = 0.98, p < 0.001 versus r = 0.84, p < 0.001). Body surface area also reflects height which body mass index under presents (r = 0.65, p < 0.001 versus r = -0.08, p = 0.35). Body mass index and body surface area were correlated with one another (r = 0.70, p < 0.001). Age was inversely correlated with body surface area (r = -0.20, p = 0.013) but not body mass index (r = 0.05, p = 0.585). Body mass index did not differ between males and females (30.1 versus 30.9, p = 0.37); however, BSA scores were significantly higher in males than females (2.11 versus 1.91, p < 0.001). Neither body surface area nor body mass index scores influenced operative versus non-operative treatment. CONCLUSION Body surface area could be a useful alternative to body mass index when considering obesity in patients with musculoskeletal knee pathology. Body surface area better reflects the effects of height, weight, age and gender than body mass index.