Literature DB >> 29120982

Total and Segmental Body Composition Examination in Collegiate Football Players Using Multifrequency Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis and Dual X-ray Absorptiometry.

Christiana J Raymond1, Donald R Dengel1,2, Tyler A Bosch3.   

Abstract

Raymond, CJ, Dengel, DR, and Bosch, TA. Total and segmental body composition examination in collegiate football players using multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual X-ray absorptiometry. J Strength Cond Res 32(3): 772-782, 2018-The current study examined the influence of player position on the agreement between multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MfBIA) and dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) when assessing total and segmental percent body fat (BF%), fat mass (FM), and fat-free mass (FFM) in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I collegiate football athletes. Forty-four male collegiate athletes (age = 19 ± 1 year; height = 1.9 ± 1.0 m; and body mass = 106.4 ± 18.8 kg) participated. Player positions included: offensive linemen (OL; n = 7), tight ends (TE; n = 4), wide receivers (WR; n = 9), defensive linemen (DL; n = 6), defensive backs (DB; n = 8), linebackers (LB; n = 6), and running backs (RB; n = 4). Total and segmental body composition measured using MfBIA were compared with values obtained using DXA. Compared with DXA, MfBIA underestimated BF% (3.0 ± 3.8%), total FM (2.5 ± 4.3 kg), arm FM (0.4 ± 0.8 kg), arm FFM (1.4 ± 0.9 kg), leg FM (2.8 ± 2.0 kg), and leg FFM (5.4 ± 2.4 kg) (all p < 0.001; arm FM p = 0.002) and overestimated total FFM (-2.4 ± 4.5 kg) (p < 0.001). Limits of agreement (LOAs) were: ±7.39% (BF%), ±8.50 kg (total FM), ±1.50 kg (arm FM), ±1.83 kg (arm FFM), ±3.83 kg (leg FM), ±4.62 kg (leg FFM), and ±8.83 kg (total FFM). No significant differences were observed between devices for trunk FM (-0.3 ± 3.0 kg; p = 0.565) and trunk FFM (0.4 ± 2.4 kg; p = 0.278), with LOAs of ±5.92 and ±4.69 kg, respectively. Player position significantly affected all between-device mean body composition measurement differences (adjusted p ≤ 0.05), with OL demonstrating the greatest effect on each variable. Therefore, MfBIA does not seem accurate in examining between-player body composition in college football players.

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29120982     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002320

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  8 in total

1.  Comparison of Multi-Frequency Bioelectrical Impedance and Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry to Assess Body Composition in College-Aged Adults.

Authors:  Rachel N Tauber; Clayton L Camic; Shuqi Zhang; Peter J Chomentowski
Journal:  Int J Exerc Sci       Date:  2020-12-01

2.  Development and validation of bioelectrical impedance prediction equations estimating regional lean soft tissue mass in middle-aged adults.

Authors:  Luís B Sardinha; Gil B Rosa; Megan Hetherington-Rauth; Inês R Correia; João P Magalhães; Analiza M Silva; Henry Lukaski
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2022-10-17       Impact factor: 4.884

3.  Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Body Composition in NCAA Division I Athletes: Exploration of Mass Distribution.

Authors:  Jennifer Sanfilippo; Diane Krueger; Bryan Heiderscheit; Neil Binkley
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 3.843

4.  Bioelectrical impedance analysis versus reference methods in the assessment of body composition in athletes.

Authors:  Francesco Campa; Luis Alberto Gobbo; Silvia Stagi; Leticia Trindade Cyrino; Stefania Toselli; Elisabetta Marini; Giuseppe Coratella
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 3.078

5.  New Frontiers of Body Composition in Sport.

Authors:  Henry Lukaski; Christiana J Raymond-Pope
Journal:  Int J Sports Med       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 2.997

6.  Asymmetry of Muscle Mass Distribution and Grip Strength in Professional Handball Players.

Authors:  Marcin Lijewski; Anna Burdukiewicz; Jadwiga Pietraszewska; Justyna Andrzejewska; Aleksandra Stachoń
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Body Composition Assessment in Mexican Children and Adolescents. Part 2: Cross-Validation of Three Bio-Electrical Impedance Methods against Dual X-ray Absorptiometry for Total-Body and Regional Body Composition.

Authors:  Desiree Lopez-Gonzalez; Jonathan C K Wells; Patricia Clark
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 5.717

Review 8.  Assessment of Body Composition in Athletes: A Narrative Review of Available Methods with Special Reference to Quantitative and Qualitative Bioimpedance Analysis.

Authors:  Francesco Campa; Stefania Toselli; Massimiliano Mazzilli; Luís Alberto Gobbo; Giuseppe Coratella
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 6.706

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.