A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better?
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemAutor
Arias Téllez, María José; Carrasco, Fernando; España Romero, Vanesa; Inostroza, Jorge; Bustamante, Alejandro; Solar-Altamirano, IgnacioEditorial
PLOS ONE
Fecha
2019-11-20Referencia bibliográfica
Arias Téllez, M.J. et. al. PLoS ONE 14(11): e0224291. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224291]
Resumen
Objective
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.
Methods
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.
Results
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.
Discussion
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.