103. Fitness Assessment, Exercise Training, and Performance of Athletes and Healthy People - sport science Scientific Abstract

3191 - Combined Anthropometry And Bioelectrical Impedance To Predicted Body Fat In Female Athletes

Session Type
Free Communication/Poster
Session Name
F-53 - Body Composition
Session Category Text
Fitness Assessment, Exercise Training, and Performance of Athletes and Healthy People
Disclosures
 C. Horswill: None.

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether combining anthropometry (skinfolds, SF) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), an indicator of hydration status, would accurately approximate the expected percentage body fat (%Fat) value and reliably predict %Fat. Accurate and reliable estimation of body composition in female athletes can be challenging since the methodological assumptions are easily violated. For example, hydration status can vary due to menstrual cycle phase, dehydration, and training, and thereby distort %Fat. We hypothesized that compared to outcomes for SF or BIA alone, %Fat using SF+BIA would not differ from our criterion method, and SF+BIA would account for a greater percent of the variance (r2) in predicting %Fat.
METHODS: Eighteen female athletes (D1 NCAA competitors) were recruited from the swim team and gymnastic team and measured for body density (air displacement plethysmography), total body water (D2O dilution), and bone mineral mass (DEXA). Assessments were applied to a four-component model (4C) to determine the criterion %Fat. Skinfolds (Slaughter 2-site equation; Lange caliper), and BIA (Chumlea TBW equation; Quantum VI, RJL) were measured as the predictors. SF was used to determine body volume and BIA was used to determine TBW; these values were then applied to Siri’s 3-component equation to predict %Fat (SF+BIA). One-way ANOVA with repeated measures was used to compare mean %Fat values determined for SF, BIA, and SF+BIA and 4C %Fat. Bonferroni multiple comparisons were used as the post hoc test (p<0.05). Regression was used to determine r2 SF, BIA, and SF+BIA vs 4C criterion.
RESULTS: A significant one-way ANOVA led to post hoc detection of differences in %Fat for BIA (26.6 +7.5) and SF+BIA (25.5 +7.2) vs. the 4C (22.3 +7.5) (p<0.05). The SF estimate (24.0 +7.8) did not differ from the 4C value. Regression revealed the highest adjusted variance accounted for in 4C was SF+BIA (r2=0.87) followed by BIA (r2=0.80) and SF (r2=0.76), all of which were statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Skinfolds alone were more accurate at predicting the mean %Fat in these female athletes but combining SF and BIA might provide greater reliability for predicting percent body fat in female athletes.
Collapse