Sardinha L B, Lohman T G, Teixeira P J, Guedes D P, Going S B
Exercise and Health Laboratory, Faculty of Human Movement, Technical University of Lisbon.
Am J Clin Nutr. 1998 Oct;68(4):786-93. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/68.4.786.
This study was designed to compare air displacement plethysmography with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and 3 other field methods for estimation of body composition. Subjects were 62 healthy, white men aged 37.6+/-2.9 y (weight: 81.8+/-11.3 kg; height: 171.5+/-4.9 cm). Body composition was also assessed by using body mass index, single-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis, multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy, and the skinfold-thickness equations of Jackson and Pollock and Durnin and Womersley. Percentage body fat (%BF) with the plethysmograph was 23.4+/-7.0 and with DXA was 26.0+/-7.4. The 2.6% mean difference was significant (P< 0.05). Total error was 3.7%BF. As assessed by multiple regression analysis, %BF with the plethysmograph, age, weight, and height yielded a DXA-adjusted R2 value of 89.5% fat and an SEE of 2.4% fat. All other models had higher SEEs and lower adjusted R2 values: 4.3% and 66.5% for body mass index, 3.3% and 79.8% for bioelectrical impedance analysis, 3.6% and 76.2% for bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy, 3.7% and 74.55% for the equations of Jackson and Pollock, and 3.9% and 71.6% for the equations of Durnin and Womersley, respectively. The plethysmograph also predicted fat mass and fat-free mass more accurately than all other models, with a lower SEE and higher adjusted R2 value. In conclusion, although %BF was systematically underestimated, body composition was closely estimated with air displacement plethysmography in middle-aged men.
本研究旨在比较空气置换体积描记法与双能X线吸收法(DXA)以及其他3种现场方法对身体成分的评估。研究对象为62名健康的白人男性,年龄37.6±2.9岁(体重:81.8±11.3千克;身高:171.5±4.9厘米)。还通过体重指数、单频生物电阻抗分析、多频生物电阻抗光谱法以及Jackson和Pollock与Durnin和Womersley的皮褶厚度公式来评估身体成分。体积描记法测得的体脂百分比(%BF)为23.4±7.0,DXA测得的为26.0±7.4。2.6%的平均差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。总误差为3.7%BF。通过多元回归分析评估,体积描记法测得的%BF、年龄、体重和身高得出经DXA校正后的脂肪R2值为89.5%,标准误为2.4%脂肪。所有其他模型的标准误更高,校正后的R2值更低:体重指数分别为4.3%和66.5%,生物电阻抗分析为3.3%和79.8%,生物电阻抗光谱法为3.6%和76.2%,Jackson和Pollock公式为3.7%和74.55%,Durnin和Womersley公式为3.9%和71.6%。体积描记法预测脂肪量和去脂体重也比所有其他模型更准确,标准误更低,校正后的R2值更高。总之,尽管%BF被系统性低估,但空气置换体积描记法在中年男性中对身体成分的评估较为准确。