两种生物电阻抗分析仪测定少女身体成分的比较。

J Nichols, S Going, M Loftin, D Stewart, E Nowicki, J Pickrel
{"title":"两种生物电阻抗分析仪测定少女身体成分的比较。","authors":"J Nichols,&nbsp;S Going,&nbsp;M Loftin,&nbsp;D Stewart,&nbsp;E Nowicki,&nbsp;J Pickrel","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to compare fat-free mass (FFM) and percent body fat determined by two bio-electrical impedance analysis (BIA) instruments against criterion estimates determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a multi-racial/ethnic sample of adolescent girls. BIA was assessed in 151 girls (n=51 African-American; n=45 Hispanic; n=55 Caucasian; age 12.2 +/- 1.2 yr) using the RJL Quantum II and the American Weights and Measures Body-Comp Scale (BCS). Percent body fat determined by BIA was significantly related to that determined by DXA (R(2)=0.87, SEE=2.8% for RJL vs DXA, P<0.0001; R(2)=0.71, SEE=4.4% for BCS vs DXA, P<0.0001). The agreement between DXA and BIA for FFM was also significant (R(2)=0.91, SEE=0.03 kg for RJL, P <0.0001; R(2)=0.79, SEE=0.04 kg for BCS, P <0.0001). The BCS overestimated FFM by 2.7 kg (P<0.0001) and underestimated percent body fat by over 4% (P<0.001). There were no differences in percent body fat between DXA and the RJL, and although the RJL significantly overestimated FFM, the absolute difference was <1 kg. Within each ethnic group, the RJL instrument more closely estimated FFM and percent body fat than did the BCS. Although both BIA instruments compared favorably with DXA, the RJL had better stability and accuracy than the BCS, for both the total sample and for the three ethnic groups. Considering its relatively low cost and minimal time required for technical training, BIA is a useful and appropriate technique for assessing body composition in adolescent girls.</p>","PeriodicalId":87474,"journal":{"name":"International journal of body composition research","volume":"4 4","pages":"153-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1905857/pdf/nihms16070.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of two bioelectrical impedance analysis instruments for determining body composition in adolescent girls.\",\"authors\":\"J Nichols,&nbsp;S Going,&nbsp;M Loftin,&nbsp;D Stewart,&nbsp;E Nowicki,&nbsp;J Pickrel\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to compare fat-free mass (FFM) and percent body fat determined by two bio-electrical impedance analysis (BIA) instruments against criterion estimates determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a multi-racial/ethnic sample of adolescent girls. BIA was assessed in 151 girls (n=51 African-American; n=45 Hispanic; n=55 Caucasian; age 12.2 +/- 1.2 yr) using the RJL Quantum II and the American Weights and Measures Body-Comp Scale (BCS). Percent body fat determined by BIA was significantly related to that determined by DXA (R(2)=0.87, SEE=2.8% for RJL vs DXA, P<0.0001; R(2)=0.71, SEE=4.4% for BCS vs DXA, P<0.0001). The agreement between DXA and BIA for FFM was also significant (R(2)=0.91, SEE=0.03 kg for RJL, P <0.0001; R(2)=0.79, SEE=0.04 kg for BCS, P <0.0001). The BCS overestimated FFM by 2.7 kg (P<0.0001) and underestimated percent body fat by over 4% (P<0.001). There were no differences in percent body fat between DXA and the RJL, and although the RJL significantly overestimated FFM, the absolute difference was <1 kg. Within each ethnic group, the RJL instrument more closely estimated FFM and percent body fat than did the BCS. Although both BIA instruments compared favorably with DXA, the RJL had better stability and accuracy than the BCS, for both the total sample and for the three ethnic groups. Considering its relatively low cost and minimal time required for technical training, BIA is a useful and appropriate technique for assessing body composition in adolescent girls.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87474,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of body composition research\",\"volume\":\"4 4\",\"pages\":\"153-160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1905857/pdf/nihms16070.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of body composition research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of body composition research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是比较两种生物电阻抗分析(BIA)仪器测定的无脂质量(FFM)和体脂百分比与双能x射线吸收仪(DXA)测定的标准估计值在多种族/民族的青春期女孩样本中。对151名女孩(n=51名非裔美国人;n = 45拉美裔;n = 55白种人;年龄12.2 +/- 1.2岁),使用RJL Quantum II和美国体重测量体重比例尺(BCS)。BIA测定的体脂百分比与DXA测定的体脂百分比显著相关(R(2)=0.87, RJL vs DXA SEE=2.8%, P
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of two bioelectrical impedance analysis instruments for determining body composition in adolescent girls.

The purpose of this study was to compare fat-free mass (FFM) and percent body fat determined by two bio-electrical impedance analysis (BIA) instruments against criterion estimates determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a multi-racial/ethnic sample of adolescent girls. BIA was assessed in 151 girls (n=51 African-American; n=45 Hispanic; n=55 Caucasian; age 12.2 +/- 1.2 yr) using the RJL Quantum II and the American Weights and Measures Body-Comp Scale (BCS). Percent body fat determined by BIA was significantly related to that determined by DXA (R(2)=0.87, SEE=2.8% for RJL vs DXA, P<0.0001; R(2)=0.71, SEE=4.4% for BCS vs DXA, P<0.0001). The agreement between DXA and BIA for FFM was also significant (R(2)=0.91, SEE=0.03 kg for RJL, P <0.0001; R(2)=0.79, SEE=0.04 kg for BCS, P <0.0001). The BCS overestimated FFM by 2.7 kg (P<0.0001) and underestimated percent body fat by over 4% (P<0.001). There were no differences in percent body fat between DXA and the RJL, and although the RJL significantly overestimated FFM, the absolute difference was <1 kg. Within each ethnic group, the RJL instrument more closely estimated FFM and percent body fat than did the BCS. Although both BIA instruments compared favorably with DXA, the RJL had better stability and accuracy than the BCS, for both the total sample and for the three ethnic groups. Considering its relatively low cost and minimal time required for technical training, BIA is a useful and appropriate technique for assessing body composition in adolescent girls.

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
期刊最新文献
Atypical antipsychotic drugs inhibit trabecular bone accrual in C57BL/6J mice. Chemical-shift water-fat MRI of white adipose depots: inability to resolve cell size differences. Estimation of whole body fat from appendicular soft tissue from peripheral quantitative computed tomography in adolescent girls. Improved body composition assessment using biceps skinfold and physical activity score in premenarcheal girls: a DXA-based validation study. Anthropometric indices as measures of body fat assessed by DXA in relation to cardiovascular risk factors in children and adolescents: NHANES 1999-2004.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1