A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better?

15Citations
Citations of this article
77Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Téllez, M. J. A., Carrasco, F., Romero, V. E., Inostroza, J., Bustamante, A., & Altamirano, I. S. (2019). A comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better? PLoS ONE, 14(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224291

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free