Bentzur Keren M, Kravitz Len, Lockner Donna W
Health, Exercise and Sports Sciences, Exercise Physiology Laboratory, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
J Strength Cond Res. 2008 Nov;22(6):1985-91. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318185f196.
This investigation examined the accuracy of the BOD POD on a group of Division I collegiate track and field female athletes (N = 30). Hydrostatic weighing (HW) was used as the gold standard method. Body density (Db) values obtained from the BOD POD (Db BP) were compared with those determined by HW (Db HW). Both Db values were converted to percent body fat (%BF) using the Siri equation for comparison. Percent body fat values obtained from the BOD POD (BF BP) were also compared with those obtained from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA, BF DXA) and skinfold (SF, BF SF). The validity of the BOD POD was assessed using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), and the relationship between the methods was examined through Pearson correlation. Average Db BP was 0.00890 g x cm(-3) lower (p < 0.05) than Db HW, resulting in a significant overestimation of %BF (p < 0.05) by the BOD POD. Values for BFDXA and BFBP also differed significantly (p < 0.05). On the other hand, BFSF and BF BP were not significantly different. The correlation between percent body fat values obtained from HW (BFHW) and BF BP was good (r = 0.88, SEE = 2.30) as well as between BF SF and BF BP (r = 0.85, SEE = 2.05). Conversely, the correlation between BFDXA and BF BP was poor (r = 0.25, SEE = 5.73). The strong correlation between BF BP and BF HW presented here suggests that the BOD POD has the potential to be used as a body composition analysis tool for female athletes. The advantages of the BOD POD over HW encourage further investigation of this instrument. However, the fact that the BOD POD and SF results did not differ significantly might suggest that the SF could be used in its place until a better rate of accuracy for this instrument is established.
本研究调查了BOD POD对一组美国大学体育协会（NCAA）一级联盟的女子田径运动员（N = 30）测量结果的准确性。以水下称重法（HW）作为金标准方法。将通过BOD POD获得的身体密度（Db）值（Db BP）与通过水下称重法确定的值（Db HW）进行比较。使用西里方程将两个Db值都转换为体脂百分比（%BF）以进行比较。还将通过BOD POD获得的体脂百分比值（BF BP）与通过双能X线吸收法（DXA，BF DXA）和皮褶厚度法（SF，BF SF）获得的值进行比较。使用重复测量方差分析（ANOVA）评估BOD POD的有效性，并通过Pearson相关性检验各方法之间的关系。平均Db BP比Db HW低0.00890 g/cm³（p < 0.05），导致BOD POD对%BF的显著高估（p < 0.05）。BF DXA和BF BP的值也有显著差异（p < 0.05）。另一方面，BF SF和BF BP没有显著差异。通过水下称重法获得的体脂百分比值（BF HW）与BF BP之间的相关性良好（r = 0.88，标准误 = 2.30），BF SF与BF BP之间的相关性也良好（r = 0.85，标准误 = 2.05）。相反，BF DXA与BF BP之间的相关性较差（r = 0.25，标准误 = 5.73）。此处呈现的BF BP与BF HW之间的强相关性表明，BOD POD有潜力用作女子运动员身体成分分析工具。BOD POD相对于水下称重法的优势促使对该仪器进行进一步研究。然而，BOD POD与皮褶厚度法结果没有显著差异这一事实可能表明，在该仪器建立更高的准确率之前，可以用皮褶厚度法取而代之。
