A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better?
<h4>Objective</h4>To compare body composition estimations of field estimation methods: Durnin & Womersley anthropometry (DW-ANT), bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and Deborah-Kerr anthropometry (DK-ANT) against dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a male Chilean sport clim...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2019-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224291 |
| _version_ | 1819037220167745536 |
|---|---|
| author | María José Arias Téllez Fernando Carrasco Vanesa España Romero Jorge Inostroza Alejandro Bustamante Ignacio Solar Altamirano |
| author_facet | María José Arias Téllez Fernando Carrasco Vanesa España Romero Jorge Inostroza Alejandro Bustamante Ignacio Solar Altamirano |
| author_sort | María José Arias Téllez |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <h4>Objective</h4>To compare body composition estimations of field estimation methods: Durnin & Womersley anthropometry (DW-ANT), bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and Deborah-Kerr anthropometry (DK-ANT) against dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a male Chilean sport climbing sample.<h4>Methods</h4>30 adult male climbers of different performance levels participated in the study. A DXA scan (Lunar Prodigy®) was used to determine fat mass, lean mass and total bone mineral content (BMC). Total muscle mass (MM, kg) was estimated through a validated prediction model. DW-ANT and BIA ("non-athletes" and "athletes" equations) were used to determinate fat mass percentage (FM %), while DK-ANT was utilized to estimate MM and BMC.<h4>Results</h4>A significant (p<0.01) inter-method difference was observed for all methods analyzed. When compared to DXA, DW-ANT and BIA underestimated FM% and DK-ANT overestimated MM and BMC (All p<0.01). The inter-method differences was lower for DW-ANT.<h4>Discussion</h4>We found that body composition estimation in climbers is highly method dependent. If DXA is not available, DW-ANT for FM% has a lower bias of estimation than BIA in young male Chilean climbers. For MM and BMC, further studies are needed to compare and estimate the DK-ANT bias level. For both methods, correction equations for specific climbing population should be considered. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-21T08:17:57Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-491a2661a6a3414eabbf36990190ff0d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-21T08:17:57Z |
| publishDate | 2019-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-491a2661a6a3414eabbf36990190ff0d2022-12-21T19:10:30ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-011411e022429110.1371/journal.pone.0224291A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better?María José Arias TéllezFernando CarrascoVanesa España RomeroJorge InostrozaAlejandro BustamanteIgnacio Solar Altamirano<h4>Objective</h4>To compare body composition estimations of field estimation methods: Durnin & Womersley anthropometry (DW-ANT), bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and Deborah-Kerr anthropometry (DK-ANT) against dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a male Chilean sport climbing sample.<h4>Methods</h4>30 adult male climbers of different performance levels participated in the study. A DXA scan (Lunar Prodigy®) was used to determine fat mass, lean mass and total bone mineral content (BMC). Total muscle mass (MM, kg) was estimated through a validated prediction model. DW-ANT and BIA ("non-athletes" and "athletes" equations) were used to determinate fat mass percentage (FM %), while DK-ANT was utilized to estimate MM and BMC.<h4>Results</h4>A significant (p<0.01) inter-method difference was observed for all methods analyzed. When compared to DXA, DW-ANT and BIA underestimated FM% and DK-ANT overestimated MM and BMC (All p<0.01). The inter-method differences was lower for DW-ANT.<h4>Discussion</h4>We found that body composition estimation in climbers is highly method dependent. If DXA is not available, DW-ANT for FM% has a lower bias of estimation than BIA in young male Chilean climbers. For MM and BMC, further studies are needed to compare and estimate the DK-ANT bias level. For both methods, correction equations for specific climbing population should be considered.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224291 |
| spellingShingle | María José Arias Téllez Fernando Carrasco Vanesa España Romero Jorge Inostroza Alejandro Bustamante Ignacio Solar Altamirano A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better? PLoS ONE |
| title | A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better? |
| title_full | A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better? |
| title_fullStr | A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better? |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better? |
| title_short | A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better? |
| title_sort | comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers which is better |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224291 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mariajoseariastellez acomparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT fernandocarrasco acomparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT vanesaespanaromero acomparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT jorgeinostroza acomparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT alejandrobustamante acomparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT ignaciosolaraltamirano acomparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT mariajoseariastellez comparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT fernandocarrasco comparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT vanesaespanaromero comparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT jorgeinostroza comparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT alejandrobustamante comparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter AT ignaciosolaraltamirano comparisonofbodycompositionassessmentmethodsinclimberswhichisbetter |