Loading…

Comparison of four quick and reliable methods of assessing body fat appropriate for clinical settings among young, middle-age, and older healthy male and female adults

[Purpose] Compare four quick (approximately 60 s), reliable methods of assessing %body-fat (%BF) among young (Y, 18–34 years), middle-age (M, 35–59 years), and older (O, 60–88 years) healthy-adults. [Participants and Methods] One-hundred-eighty healthy males-and-females were equally (n=30) divided i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Physical Therapy Science 2024, Vol.36(9), pp.518-525
Main Authors: Escamilla, Rafael F., Yamashiro, Kyle, Asuncion, Robert, MacLean, Daniel, Thompson, Irwin Scott, McKeough, Michael
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:[Purpose] Compare four quick (approximately 60 s), reliable methods of assessing %body-fat (%BF) among young (Y, 18–34 years), middle-age (M, 35–59 years), and older (O, 60–88 years) healthy-adults. [Participants and Methods] One-hundred-eighty healthy males-and-females were equally (n=30) divided into Y, M, and O age groups to assess %BF. The %BF methods were: 1) Bioelectrical-impedance-Inbody770 (IB)–criterion reference; 2) Body-mass-index (BMI); 3) Abdominal-and-hip circumferences (CIR); and 4) Skinfold (SF). [Results] %BF were significantly different among the four body-fat methods and among the three age-groups for both males-and-females. %BF among IB,BMI,CIR, and SF were, respectively, 15.7 ± 4.7%, 19.6 ± 3.2%, 17.3 ± 3.5%, and 12.1 ± 4.1% for Y-males; 18.3 ± 5.7%, 22.8 ± 3.6%, 19.6 ± 3.6%, and 15.6 ± 4.5% for M-males; 24.4 ± 6.5%, 25.8 ± 3.3%, 24.0 ± 4.5%, and 20.0 ± 4.1% for O-males; 24.9 ± 6.9%, 28.9 ± 4.1%, 29.4 ± 4.6%, and 22.4 ± 6.3% for Y-females; 25.1 ± 7.0%, 31.4 ± 4.7%, 33.0 ± 4.5%, and 25.0 ± 4.5% for M-females; 35.1 ± 6.3%, 35.5 ± 4.3%, 38.4 ± 4.8%, and 26.4 ± 3.7% for O-females. [Conclusion]The most accurate %BF-methods to use in clinical settings are CIR for Y-and-M-males, CIR and BMI for O-males, SF for Y-and M-females, and BMI for O-females. The least accurate %BF methods are BMI and SF for Y-males, BMI for M-males, SF for O-males, BMI and CIR for Y-and M-females, and SF for O-females. While all 4-methods of assessing %BF can easily and quickly be employed in clinical settings, some methods significantly underestimate or overestimate %BF and yield different results among varying age groups and sex. These findings help identify people at early health risk of cardiometabolic disease, with O-males and O-females at higher risk.
ISSN:0915-5287
2187-5626
DOI:10.1589/jpts.36.518