Publication details
Srovnání metod pro odhad procentuálního zastoupení tělesného tuku u mladých žen z Brna a okolí
| Title in English | Comparison of body fat percentage estimation methods in young women from Brno and its surroundings |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2016 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Česká antropologie - časopis České společnosti antropologické |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | http://anthropology.cz/docs/ca2016/2016_66_2_04-09.pdf |
| Field | Archaeology, anthropology, ethnology |
| Keywords | nutritional status; body fat; bioimpedance; method by Pařízková (1962); Tanita BC-545; InBody 230; BodyStat 1500 MDD |
| Description | There are many methods available to evaluate nutritional status. The aim of this paper was to compare the results of caliperation and three bioimpedance analyzers. 100 females, patients of the Gynfit s.r.o. center participated in the study. The participants were all between their 20 and 30 years of age and of varying lifestyles. Anthropometric measurements were taken and bioimpedance examination was carried out while adhering to standard conditions and conditions of the manufacturer. To estimate body fat percentage an anthropometric method by Pařízková (1962) was used which calculates with 10 skinfold thicknesses as measured by a Best type caliper. Three bioimpedance analyzers were used to estimate body fat by BIA: Tanita BC-545, InBody 230 and BodyStat 1500 MDD. The working hypothesis stated that individual methods do not differ in body fat percentage estimation. This hypothesis was tested non-parametrically using Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA. The test manifested on the p level of 0,05 that results of at least two methods are significantly different. Multiple p-values comparisons then established that body fat percentage estimate by method of Pařízková (1962) is significantly different from the estimate provided by bioimpedance analyzers. The caliperation method estimates a significantly lower percentage of body fat than all bioimpedance analyzers. Also, the body fat percentage estimated by Tanita BC-545 differs from the results acquired by BodyStat 1500 MDD, as Tanita BC-545 estimates significantly higher fat percentage than BodyStat 1500 MDD. In fact, Tanita BC-545 estimates significantly higher body fat percentage than any other method which we used. These findings contradict the findings of other authors, for example Riegerová and Přidalová (1996) or Barreto Silva et al. (2008) who did not find a significant difference between caliperation and bioimpedance method results. Our findings suggest that results acquired using different methods are incomparable. |