These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Evaluation of the BOD POD and leg-to-leg bioelectrical impedance analysis for estimating percent body fat in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division III collegiate wrestlers.
    Author: Dixon CB, Deitrick RW, Pierce JR, Cutrufello PT, Drapeau LL.
    Journal: J Strength Cond Res; 2005 Feb; 19(1):85-91. PubMed ID: 15705050.
    Abstract:
    The purpose of this study was to compare percent body fat (%BF) estimated by air displacement plethysmography (ADP) and leg-to-leg bioelectrical impedance analysis (LBIA) with hydrostatic weighing (HW) in a group (n = 25) of NCAA Division III collegiate wrestlers. Body composition was assessed during the preseason wrestling weight certification program (WCP) using the NCAA approved methods (HW, 3-site skinfold [SF], and ADP) and LBIA, which is currently an unaccepted method of assessment. A urine specific gravity less than 1.020, measured by refractometry, was required before all testing. Each subject had all of the assessments performed on the same day. LBIA measurements (Athletic mode) were determined using a Tanita body fat analyzer (model TBF-300A). Hydrostatic weighing, corrected for residual lung volume, was used as the criterion measurement. The %BF data (mean +/- SD) were LBIA (12.3 +/- 4.6), ADP (13.8 +/- 6.3), SF (14.2 +/- 5.3), and HW (14.5 +/- 6.0). %BF estimated by LBIA was significantly (p < 0.01) smaller than HW and SF. There were no significant differences in body density or %BF estimated by ADP, SF, and HW. All methods showed significant correlations (r = 0.80-0.96; p < 0.01) with HW. The standard errors of estimate (SEE) for %BF were 1.68, 1.87, and 3.60%; pure errors (PE) were 1.88, 1.94, and 4.16% (ADP, SF, and LBIA, respectively). Bland-Atman plots for %BF demonstrated no systematic bias for ADP, SF, and LBIA when compared with HW. These preliminary findings support the use of ADP and SF for estimating %BF during the NCAA WCP in Division III wrestlers. LBIA, which consistently underestimated %BF, is not supported by these data as a valid assessment method for this athletic group.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]