Suppr超能文献

[委内瑞拉成年人中两种用于估计体格大小的人体测量方法的比较]

[Comparison of 2 anthropometric methods for the estimation of frame size in Venezuelan adults].

作者信息

Hernández Hernández R A, Hernández de Valera Y

机构信息

Universidad Simón Bolívar.

出版信息

Arch Latinoam Nutr. 1999 Dec;49(4):344-50.

Abstract

The frame size improves the interpretation of the body mass in adult and its incorporation is very useful in the assessment of nutritional status. This study compared two of the anthropometric methods used to classify individuals according to frame size: Grant method (height (cm)/wrist circumference (cm)) and Frame index 2 (elbow breadth (mm)/height (cm) x 100) in order to identify coincidence, concordance and divergence between then. Data from two hundred and forty nine apparently healthy individuals, between the ages of 22 and 63, belonging to "Health Project: Administration employees of the Simón Bolívar University" were included. Results showed significant differences between the two methods, not only in the proportion of classified individuals in each frame size category, but also when contrasted the same method using one or another body hemispheres. When studying both methods, the divergence in frame size identification varied between 19% and 55% with a low concordance (k = < or = 0.40). Grant method, compared to Frame index 2 showed a greater association with the variables and indicators of total body mass and body fat; in the other hand, Frame index 2 revealed a lesser correlation with such variables and indicators specially in female (r = 0.17 with fat percentage). These results clearly show the differences that could be created in the frame size identification of an individual of group of individuals if different criteria are used; this could also lead to a wrong anthropometric diagnosis.

摘要

体格大小有助于对成年人的体重进行解读,将其纳入考量对营养状况评估非常有用。本研究比较了两种用于根据体格大小对个体进行分类的人体测量方法:格兰特法(身高(厘米)/手腕周长(厘米))和体格指数2(肘宽(毫米)/身高(厘米)×100),以确定两者之间的一致性、协调性和差异性。研究纳入了249名年龄在22岁至63岁之间、表面健康、属于“健康项目:西蒙·玻利瓦尔大学行政员工”的个体的数据。结果显示,两种方法之间存在显著差异,不仅在每个体格大小类别中分类个体的比例上,而且在使用一个或另一个身体半球对比相同方法时也是如此。在研究这两种方法时,体格大小识别的差异在19%至55%之间,一致性较低(k≤0.40)。与体格指数2相比,格兰特法与总体重和体脂的变量及指标的关联性更强;另一方面,体格指数2与这些变量及指标的相关性较弱,尤其是在女性中(与脂肪百分比的相关性r = 0.17)。这些结果清楚地表明,如果使用不同标准,在个体或个体群体的体格大小识别中可能会产生差异;这也可能导致错误的人体测量诊断。

相似文献

5
Comparison of determinants of frame size in older adults.老年人镜框尺寸决定因素的比较。
J Am Diet Assoc. 1993 Jan;93(1):53-7. doi: 10.1016/0002-8223(93)92131-g.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验