Smith-Ryan Abbie E, Blue Malia N M, Trexler Eric T, Hirsch Katie R
Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Human Movement Sciences, Department of Allied Health Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2018 Mar;38(2):220-226. doi: 10.1111/cpf.12402. Epub 2016 Dec 16.
Measurement of body composition to assess health risk and prevention is expanding. Accurate portable techniques are needed to facilitate use in clinical settings. This study evaluated the accuracy and repeatability of a portable ultrasound (US) in comparison with a four-compartment criterion for per cent body fat (%Fat) in overweight/obese adults. Fifty-one participants (mean ± SD; age: 37·2 ± 11·3 years; BMI: 31·6 ± 5·2 kg m ) were measured for %Fat using US (GE Logiq-e) and skinfolds. A subset of 36 participants completed a second day of the same measurements, to determine reliability. US and skinfold %Fat were calculated using the seven-site Jackson-Pollock equation. The Wang 4C model was used as the criterion method for %Fat. Compared to a gold standard criterion, US %Fat (36·4 ± 11·8%; P = 0·001; standard error of estimate [SEE] = 3·5%) was significantly higher than the criterion (33·0 ± 8·0%), but not different than skinfolds (35·3 ± 5·9%; P = 0·836; SEE = 4·5%). US resulted in good reliability, with no significant differences from Day 1 (39·95 ± 15·37%) to Day 2 (40·01 ± 15·42%). Relative consistency was 0·96, and standard error of measure was 0·94%. Although US overpredicted %Fat compared to the criterion, a moderate SEE for US is suggestive of a practical assessment tool in overweight individuals. %Fat differences reported from these field-based techniques are less than reported by other single-measurement laboratory methods and therefore may have utility in a clinical setting. This technique may also accurately track changes.
用于评估健康风险和预防的身体成分测量方法正在不断扩展。需要准确的便携式技术以方便在临床环境中使用。本研究评估了一种便携式超声(US)与超重/肥胖成年人身体脂肪百分比(%Fat)的四成分标准相比的准确性和可重复性。使用US(GE Logiq-e)和皮褶厚度测量了51名参与者(均值±标准差;年龄:37.2±11.3岁;BMI:31.6±5.2 kg/m²)的%Fat。36名参与者的子集完成了第二天相同的测量,以确定可靠性。使用七点杰克逊-波洛克方程计算US和皮褶厚度的%Fat。将王4C模型用作%Fat的标准方法。与金标准相比,US的%Fat(36.4±11.8%;P = 0.001;估计标准误差[SEE]=3.5%)显著高于标准(33.0±8.0%),但与皮褶厚度(35.3±5.9%;P = 0.836;SEE = 4.5%)无差异。US具有良好的可靠性,第一天(39.95±15.37%)和第二天(40.01±15.42%)之间无显著差异。相对一致性为0.96,测量标准误差为0.94%。尽管与标准相比,US高估了%Fat,但US适度的SEE表明其在超重个体中是一种实用的评估工具。这些基于现场的技术报告的%Fat差异小于其他单次测量实验室方法报告的差异,因此可能在临床环境中有用。该技术也可能准确跟踪变化。