Brodie D A, Eston R G
Department of Movement Science and Physical Education, University of Liverpool, U.K.
Int J Sports Med. 1992 May;13(4):319-25. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1021274.
The purpose of this study was to examine body fat estimation using three methods of electrical impedance (the BIA-103 Body Composition Analyser--RJL Systems, Detroit; the BMR 2000 Body Composition Analyzer--Berkeley Medical Research, San Leandro; the BC300 Body Composition Analyzer--Spacelabs, Dallas) and an infra-red interactance method (Futrex 5000 Analyzer--Futrex Inc. Gaithersburg) as an alternative to hydrodensitometry. Five different groups were examined using at least one of the electrical systems and in all cases utilising hydrodensitometry as the criterion method. The results produced highly significant correlations between all methods, but caution is recommended due to the limited common variance in some cases. The individual electrical methods differed from hydrodensitometry by a maximum of 1.1% in obese women, by 21.6% in athletic adults, by 6.2% in the slightly obese group, by 8.1% in normal women and by 56.0% in normal children. Significant mean differences between one of the impedance methods and hydrodensitometry were only noted in two of the groups tested. This suggests, allowing for the limitations of hydrodensitometry itself, that the other three electrical methods appear to be reasonably valid alternatives to underwater weighing, especially for field work of an epidemiological nature.
本研究的目的是检验三种电阻抗方法（BIA - 103人体成分分析仪——RJL系统公司，底特律；BMR 2000人体成分分析仪——伯克利医学研究公司，圣莱安德罗；BC300人体成分分析仪——太空实验室公司，达拉斯）以及一种红外光相互作用法（Futrex 5000分析仪——Futrex公司，盖瑟斯堡）用于估计体脂的情况，以替代水下密度测定法。使用至少一种电学系统对五个不同组进行了检测，并且在所有情况下均将水下密度测定法作为标准方法。所有方法之间的结果都呈现出高度显著的相关性，但由于某些情况下共同方差有限，建议谨慎使用。个体电学方法与水下密度测定法的差异在肥胖女性中最大为1.1%，在运动员成年人中为21.6%，在轻度肥胖组中为6.2%，在正常女性中为8.1%，在正常儿童中为56.0%。仅在两个测试组中发现了一种阻抗方法与水下密度测定法之间存在显著的平均差异。这表明，考虑到水下密度测定法本身的局限性，其他三种电学方法似乎是水下称重的合理有效替代方法，特别是对于流行病学性质的现场工作。
