Warner J G, Yeater R, Sherwood L, Weber K
Br J Sports Med. 1986 Mar;20(1):17-21. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.20.1.17.
The purpose of this study was to establish the validity and reliability of a hydrostatic weighing method using total lung capacity (measuring vital capacity with a respirometer at the time of weighing) the prone position, and a small oblong tank. The validity of the method was established by comparing the TLC prone (tank) method against three hydrostatic weighing methods administered in a pool. The three methods included residual volume seated, TLC seated and TLC prone. Eighty male and female subjects were underwater weighed using each of the four methods. Validity coefficients for per cent body fat between the TLC prone (tank) method and the RV seated (pool), TLC seated (pool) and TLC prone (pool) methods were .98, .99 and .99, respectively. A randomised complete block ANOVA found significant differences between the RV seated (pool) method and each of the three TLC methods with respect to both body density and per cent body fat. The differences were negligible with respect to HW error. Reliability of the TLC prone (tank) method was established by weighing twenty subjects three different times with ten-minute time intervals between testing. Multiple correlations yielded reliability coefficients for body density and per cent body fat values of .99 and .99, respectively. It was concluded that the TLC prone (tank) method is valid, reliable and a favourable method of hydrostatic weighing.
本研究的目的是建立一种使用总肺容量(称重时用肺活量计测量肺活量)、俯卧位和小型长方形水箱的静水称重法的有效性和可靠性。通过将俯卧位(水箱)总肺容量法与在泳池中进行的三种静水称重法进行比较,确定了该方法的有效性。这三种方法包括坐位残气量、坐位总肺容量和俯卧位总肺容量。80名男性和女性受试者使用这四种方法分别进行水下称重。俯卧位(水箱)总肺容量法与坐位残气量(泳池)、坐位总肺容量(泳池)和俯卧位总肺容量(泳池)法之间的体脂百分比有效性系数分别为0.98、0.99和0.99。随机完全区组方差分析发现,坐位残气量(泳池)法与三种总肺容量法在身体密度和体脂百分比方面均存在显著差异。就静水称重误差而言,差异可忽略不计。通过对20名受试者进行三次不同时间的称重,每次测试间隔10分钟,确定了俯卧位(水箱)总肺容量法的可靠性。多重相关性得出身体密度和体脂百分比值的可靠性系数分别为0.99和0.99。得出的结论是,俯卧位(水箱)总肺容量法是有效的、可靠的,并且是一种有利的静水称重方法。