| Literature DB >> 35162755 |
Luis Alberto Gobbo1, Raquel David Langer2, Elisabetta Marini3, Roberto Buffa3, Juliano Henrique Borges2, Mauro A Pascoa2, Vagner X Cirolini2, Gil Guerra-Júnior2, Ezequiel Moreira Gonçalves2.
Abstract
The military are selected on the basis of physical standards and are regularly involved in strong physical activities, also related to particular sports training. The aims of the study were to analyze the effect of a 7-month military training program on body composition variables and the suitability of specific 'bioelectrical impedance vector analysis' (spBIVA), compared to DXA, to detect the changes in body composition. A sample of 270 male Brazilian cadets (19.1 ± 1.1 years), composed of a group practicing military physical training routine only (MT = 155) and a group involved in a specific sport training (SMT = 115), were measured by body composition assessments (evaluated by means of DXA and spBIVA) at the beginning and the end of the military routine year. The effect of training on body composition was similar in SMT and MT groups, with an increase in LST. DXA and spBIVA were correlated, with specific resistance (Rsp) and reactance (Xcsp) positively related to fat mass (FM), FM%, LST, and lean soft tissue index (LSTI), and phase angle positively related to LST and LSTI. Body composition variations due to physical training were recognized by spBIVA: the increase in muscle mass was indicated by the phase angle and Xcsp increase, and the stability of FM% was consistent with the unchanged values of Rsp. Military training produced an increase in muscle mass, but no change in FM%, independently of the sample characteristics at baseline and the practice of additional sports. SpBIVA is a suitable technique for the assessment of body composition in military people.Entities:
Keywords: bioelectrical impedance; fat mass; lean soft tissue; muscle mass; phase angle; vector analysis
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35162755 PMCID: PMC8834877 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19031732
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Descriptive statistics for body composition of Brazilian Military (N = 270) at the beginning of the routine year.
| Variables | Mean | SD | 95% IC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weight, kg | 69.9 | 8.9 | 68.9–71.0 |
| Height, cm | 175.7 | 6.4 | 174.9–176.4 |
| BMI, kg·m−2 | 22.6 | 2.4 | 22.4–22.9 |
| Waist crf, cm | 76.2 | 4.8 | 75.7–76.8 |
| LSTI, kg·m−2 | 17.9 | 1.6 | 17.7–18.0 |
| FM, kg | 12.2 | 3.7 | 11.7–12.6 |
| LST, kg | 55.2 | 6.4 | 54.4–55.9 |
| BMC, kg | 3.0 | 0.4 | 2.9–3.0 |
| FM% | 17.1 | 3.8 | 16.6–17.5 |
| Rsp, ohm·cm | 313.0 | 28.8 | 309.8–316.8 |
| Xcsp, ohm·cm | 40.9 | 5.7 | 40.2–41.6 |
| Phase Angle, degrees | 7.4 | 0.8 | 7.3–7.5 |
Legend: SD = standard deviation; BMI = body mass index; LSTI = lean soft tissue index; FM = fat mass; LST = lean soft tissue; BMC = bone mineral content; FM% = fat mass percent; Rsp = specific resistance; Xcsp = specific reactance.
Figure 1Distribution of bioelectrical values of Brazilian Military onto tolerance ellipses representing Italian-Spanish young adults, at the beginning of the routine year.
Matrix of correlation between bioelectric and DXA variables (N = 270) at baseline.
| Rsp | Xcsp | PA | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| r |
| r |
| r |
| |
| FM, kg | 0.582 | 0.000 | 0.406 | 0.000 | 0.030 | 0.627 |
| FM% | 0.556 | 0.000 | 0.326 | 0.000 | −0.049 | 0.418 |
| LST, kg | 0.229 | 0.000 | 0.300 | 0.000 | 0.189 | 0.002 |
| LSTI, kg·m−2 | 0.292 | 0.000 | 0.497 | 0.000 | 0.400 | 0.000 |
Legend: r = Pearson correlation coefficient; p = p value; FM = fat mass; FM% = fat mass percent; LST = lean soft tissue; LSTI = lean soft tissue index; Rsp = specific resistance; Xcsp = specific reactance; PA = phase angle.
Descriptive and comparative statistics.
| SMT (N = 115) | MT (N = 155) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre | Post | Pre | Post | ||||||||
| Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | Mean | Sd | Fg | Ft | Fgxt | |
| Weight, kg | 71.0 | 8.7 | 73.0 | 8.7 | 69.1 | 9.0 | 70.8 | 8.2 | 0.006 | 0.018 | 0.826 |
| Height, cm | 176.4 | 6.3 | 176.7 | 6.2 | 175.1 | 6.5 | 175.3 | 6.5 | 0.023 | 0.521 | 0.979 |
| BMI, kg·m−2 | 22.8 | 2.1 | 23.3 | 2.1 | 22.5 | 2.5 | 23.0 | 2.2 | 0.147 | 0.014 | 0.868 |
| Waist crf, cm | 77.2 | 4.9 | 78.5 | 5.1 | 75.5 | 4.6 | 77.2 | 4.3 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.581 |
| FM, kg | 11.5 | 3.2 | 12.2 | 3.1 | 12.6 | 4.0 | 12.7 | 3.3 | 0.011 | 0.253 | 0.305 |
| LST, kg | 56.9 | 6.6 | 58.1 | 6.6 | 53.9 | 5.9 | 55.5 | 5.8 | 0.000 | 0.009 | 0.671 |
| LSTI, kg·m−2 | 18.3 | 1.6 | 18.6 | 1.5 | 17.6 | 1.5 | 18.0 | 1.4 | 0.000 | 0.004 | 0.541 |
| BMC, kg | 3.1 | 0.4 | 3.1 | 0.4 | 2.9 | 0.4 | 3.0 | 0.4 | 0.000 | 0.118 | 0.991 |
| FM%, % | 16.0 | 3.3 | 16.5 | 3.1 | 17.9 | 3.9 | 17.6 | 3.3 | 0.000 | 0.720 | 0.199 |
| Rsp, ohm | 314.8 | 27.6 | 312.7 | 26.5 | 311.7 | 29.6 | 310.8 | 28.3 | 0.316 | 0.544 | 0.816 |
| Xcsp, ohm | 41.9 | 5.5 | 45.7 | 6.5 | 40.1 | 5.7 | 44.0 | 6.1 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.911 |
| PA, degree | 7.6 | 0.8 | 8.3 | 0.9 | 7.3 | 0.7 | 8.1 | 0.8 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.966 |
Legend: SMT: Sports and Military Training; MT: Military Training only; F, F test of two-way ANOVA for group (Fg), training (Ft), and group-training interaction (Fgxt); BMI = body mass index; FM = fat mass; FM% = fat mass percent; LST = lean soft tissue; LSTI = lean soft tissue index; Rsp = specific resistance; Xcsp = specific reactance; PA = phase angle.
Figure 2Confidence ellipses with T2 Hotelling’s test in the two groups before and after training. Legend: SMT: Sports and Military Training; MT: Military Training only. Comparisons between SMT and MT were performed using two-sample Hotelling’s T2 tests, while those between pre- and post- training groups were performed with paired one-sample Hotelling’s T2 tests.