CONTEXT: Whether bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis can be used interchangeably to establish minimal wrestling weights (MWWs) is unknown. Using both methods in a particular program may result in the misclassification of some athletes. OBJECTIVE: To compare the MWW calculated from skinfold measurements with those derived from 5 bioelectrical impedance equations and determine if the 2 methods could be used interchangeably for high school wrestlers. DESIGN: Repeated measurements were obtained using bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis to determine MWWs. Data were collected during the preseason. SETTING: High school. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred eight wrestlers (151 males, 57 females), aged 13 to 18 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The bioelectrical impedance analysis was conducted with the MWW protocol administered annually by certified athletic trainers. The resistance and reactance were used in 5 equations to investigate the level of agreement between bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis for determining MWW. The MWWs were based on a minimum body fat of 7.0% for males and 14.0% for females. RESULTS: When comparing bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis, we found prediction error ranged from 1.51 to 2.34 kg for males and 0.27 to 9.16 kg for females. CONCLUSIONS: To protect the health of the athletes and maintain competitive equity, a single method should be used to determine MWWs. Bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis cannot be used interchangeably to determine MWWs.
CONTEXT: Whether bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis can be used interchangeably to establish minimal wrestling weights (MWWs) is unknown. Using both methods in a particular program may result in the misclassification of some athletes. OBJECTIVE: To compare the MWW calculated from skinfold measurements with those derived from 5 bioelectrical impedance equations and determine if the 2 methods could be used interchangeably for high school wrestlers. DESIGN: Repeated measurements were obtained using bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis to determine MWWs. Data were collected during the preseason. SETTING: High school. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred eight wrestlers (151 males, 57 females), aged 13 to 18 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The bioelectrical impedance analysis was conducted with the MWW protocol administered annually by certified athletic trainers. The resistance and reactance were used in 5 equations to investigate the level of agreement between bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis for determining MWW. The MWWs were based on a minimum body fat of 7.0% for males and 14.0% for females. RESULTS: When comparing bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis, we found prediction error ranged from 1.51 to 2.34 kg for males and 0.27 to 9.16 kg for females. CONCLUSIONS: To protect the health of the athletes and maintain competitive equity, a single method should be used to determine MWWs. Bioelectrical impedance and skinfold analysis cannot be used interchangeably to determine MWWs.
Authors: A C Utter; J R Scott; R A Oppliger; P S Visich; F L Goss; B L Marks; D C Nieman; B W Smith Journal: J Strength Cond Res Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: W G Thorland; C M Tipton; T G Lohman; R W Bowers; T J Housh; G O Johnson; J M Kelly; R A Oppliger; T K Tcheng Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 1991-09 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: J L Clasey; J A Kanaley; L Wideman; S B Heymsfield; C D Teates; M E Gutgesell; M O Thorner; M L Hartman; A Weltman Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 1999-05
Authors: María Fernandez-Del-Valle; Hugo Olmedillas; Nieves Palacios Gil de Antuñano; Ana María Ribas; Pablo Martínez-Camblor; Ángela García-Gonzalez; Natalia Úbeda; Eduardo Iglesias-Gutiérrez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-08 Impact factor: 4.614