三维光学扫描在身体成分评估中的应用：四种商业可用扫描仪的四组分模型比较。
3-Dimensional optical scanning for body composition assessment: A 4-component model comparison of four commercially available scanners.
机构信息
Energy Balance & Body Composition Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology & Sport Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Energy Balance & Body Composition Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology & Sport Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.
出版信息
Clin Nutr. 2020 Oct;39(10):3160-3167. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2020.02.008. Epub 2020 Feb 15.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Body composition assessment via 3-dimensional optical (3DO) scanning has emerged as a rapid and simple evaluation method. The aim of this study was to establish the precision of body composition estimates from four commercially available 3DO scanners and evaluate their validity as compared to a reference 4-component (4C) model.
METHODS
The body composition of 171 participants was assessed using four commercially-available 3DO scanners (FIT3D®, Naked Labs®, Size Stream®, and Styku®) and a 4C model utilizing data from dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, air displacement plethysmography, and bioimpedance spectroscopy. Body composition estimates were compared via equivalence testing, Deming regression, Bland-Altman analysis, concordance correlation coefficients (CCC), root mean square error (RMSE), and related metrics. Precision metrics, including the root mean square coefficient of variation (RMS-%CV), precision error, and intraclass correlation coefficient, were generated for duplicate scans in 139 participants.
RESULTS
All scanners produced reasonably reliable estimates, with RMS-%CV of 2.3-4.3% for body fat percentage (BF%), 2.5-4.3% for fat mass (FM), and 0.7-1.4% for fat-free mass (FFM). ICC values ranged from 0.975 to 0.996 for BF% and 0.990 to 0.999 for FM and FFM. All scanners except Styku® demonstrated equivalence with 4C, using 5% equivalence regions, and constant errors of <1% for BF% and ≤0.5 kg for FM and FFM. However, the slopes of regression lines differed from the line of identity for most scanners and variables. CCC values ranged from 0.74 to 0.90 for BF%, 0.85 to 0.95 for FM, and 0.93 to 0.97 for FFM. RMSE values ranged from 3.7 to 6.1% for BF% and 2.8-4.6 kg for FM and FFM. Bland-Altman analysis indicated proportional bias of varying magnitudes was present for all scanners.
CONCLUSIONS
Commercially available 3DO scanners produce relatively reliable body composition estimates. Three out of four scanners demonstrated equivalence with a 4C model for assessments of BF%, FM, and FFM, although other metrics of validity varied among scanners, and proportional bias was present for all scanners.
背景与目的
通过三维光学（3DO）扫描进行人体成分评估已成为一种快速、简单的评估方法。本研究旨在建立四种市售 3DO 扫描仪的人体成分估计的精密度，并评估其与参考 4 成分（4C）模型相比的有效性。
方法
使用四种市售 3DO 扫描仪（FIT3D®、 Naked Labs®、Size Stream®和 Styku®）和利用双能 X 射线吸收法、空气置换体描记法和生物阻抗谱法获得的 4C 模型，对 171 名参与者的人体成分进行评估。通过等效性检验、Deming 回归、Bland-Altman 分析、一致性相关系数（CCC）、均方根误差（RMSE）和相关指标比较人体成分估计值。在 139 名参与者的重复扫描中生成精密度指标，包括均方根变异系数（RMS-%CV）、精密度误差和内类相关系数。
结果
所有扫描仪均产生了相当可靠的估计值，体脂百分比（BF%）的 RMS-%CV 为 2.3-4.3%，脂肪量（FM）为 2.5-4.3%，去脂体重（FFM）为 0.7-1.4%。ICC 值范围为 BF%的 0.975 至 0.996 和 FM 和 FFM 的 0.990 至 0.999。除 Styku®外，所有扫描仪均使用 5%的等效区域和 BF%和 FM 和 FFM 的 <1%的恒定误差，显示与 4C 的等效性。然而，大多数扫描仪和变量的回归线斜率与身份线不同。CCC 值范围为 BF%的 0.74 至 0.90、FM 的 0.85 至 0.95 和 FFM 的 0.93 至 0.97。RMSE 值范围为 BF%的 3.7 至 6.1%和 FM 和 FFM 的 2.8-4.6kg。Bland-Altman 分析表明，所有扫描仪均存在不同程度的比例偏差。
结论
市售的 3DO 扫描仪可生成相对可靠的人体成分估计值。四台扫描仪中有三台在 BF%、FM 和 FFM 的评估中与 4C 模型具有等效性，尽管其他有效性指标在扫描仪之间有所不同，并且所有扫描仪均存在比例偏差。
Zotero 插件