首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Nutrients >Comparison of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Slaughter Skinfold-Thickness Equations and Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry for Estimating Body Fat Percentage in Colombian Children and Adolescents with Excess of Adiposity
【2h】

Comparison of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Slaughter Skinfold-Thickness Equations and Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry for Estimating Body Fat Percentage in Colombian Children and Adolescents with Excess of Adiposity

机译:比较生物电阻抗分析屠宰皮肤褶皱厚度方程式和双能X射线吸收法估算肥胖儿童哥伦比亚青少年的体脂百分比

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has been considered a reference method for measuring body fat percentage (BF%) in children and adolescents with an excess of adiposity. However, given that the DXA technique is impractical for routine field use, there is a need to investigate other methods that can accurately determine BF%. We studied the accuracy of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) technology, including foot-to-foot and hand-to-foot impedance, and Slaughter skinfold-thickness equations in the measurement of BF%, compared with DXA, in a population of Latin American children and adolescents with an excess of adiposity. A total of 127 children and adolescents (11–17 years of age; 70% girls) from the HEPAFIT (Exercise Training and Hepatic Metabolism in Overweight/Obese Adolescent) study were included in the present work. BF% was measured on the same day using two BIA analysers (Seca® 206, Allers Hamburg, Germany and Model Tanita® BC-418®, TANITA Corporation, Sportlife Tokyo, Japan), skinfold measurements (Slaughter equation), and DXA (Hologic Horizon DXA System®, Quirugil, Bogotá, Columbia). Agreement between measurements was analysed using t-tests, Bland–Altman plots, and Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (ρc). There was a significant correlation between DXA and the other BF% measurement methods (r > 0.430). According to paired t-tests, in both sexes, BF% assessed by BIA analysers or Slaughter equations differ from BF% assessed by DXA (p < 0.001). The lower and upper limits of the differences compared with DXA were 6.3–22.9, 2.2–2.8, and −3.2–21.3 (95% CI) in boys and 2.3–14.8, 2.4–20.1, and 3.9–18.3 (95% CI) in girls for Seca® mBCA, Tanita® BC 420MA, and Slaughter equations, respectively. Concordance was poor between DXA and the other methods of measuring BF% (ρc < 0.5). BIA analysers and Slaughter equations underestimated BF% measurements compared to DXA, so they are not interchangeable methods for assessing BF% in Latin American children and adolescents with excess of adiposity.
机译:双能X射线吸收法(DXA)被认为是测量肥胖症儿童和青少年体内脂肪百分比(BF%)的参考方法。但是,鉴于DXA技术对于常规现场使用是不切实际的,因此有必要研究其他可以准确确定BF%的方法。我们研究了拉丁美洲人口中生物电阻抗分析(BIA)技术的准确性,包括与DXA相比在BF%测量中的脚到脚和手到脚的阻抗以及Slaughter皮褶厚度公式。肥胖过多的儿童和青少年。 HEPAFIT(超重/肥胖青少年的运动训练和肝代谢)研究的总共127名儿童和青少年(11-17岁; 70%的女孩)被纳入本研究。使用两台BIA分析仪(Seca ® 206,德国Allers Hamburg和Model Tanita ® BC-418 ®)在同一天测量BF% ,TANITA Corporation(日本东京Sportlife),皮褶测量(Slaughter方程)和DXA(Hologic Horizo​​n DXA System ®,Qurugilil,波哥大,哥伦比亚)。使用t检验,Bland-Altman图和Lin的一致性相关系数(ρc)分析了测量之间的一致性。 DXA与其他BF%测量方法之间存在显着相关性(r> 0.430)。根据配对t检验,在两个性别中,BIA分析仪或Slaughter方程评估的BF%与DXA评估的BF%不同(p <0.001)。与DXA相比,男孩的差异上下限分别为6.3–22.9、2.2–2.8和−3.2–21.3(95%CI)以及2.3–14.8、2.4–20.1和3.9–18.3(95%CI)在女孩中分别使用了Seca ® mBCA,Tanita ® BC 420MA和Slaughter方程。 DXA与其他测定BF%的方法之间的一致性差(ρc<0.5)。与DXA相比,BIA分析仪和Slaughter方程低估了BF%的测量值,因此,对于肥胖过多的拉丁美洲儿童和青少年来说,它们不是可替代的评估BF%的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号