Assessment of Body Composition by Skinfold Anthropometry and Bioelectrical Impedance Technique: A Comparative Study
- 1 September 1994
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
- Vol. 18 (5), 427-429
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0148607194018005427
Abstract
Both skinfold anthropometry and bioelectrical impedance are indirect, simple bedside methods to assess body composition. It is not clear, however, whether the results of these methods are comparable. In this study, body composition was determined in 449 subjects by skinfold anthropometry and by bioelectrical impedance. Percentage of body fat ranged from 8.0% to 47.5% with the skinfold technique and from 0.6% to 78.5% with bioelectrical impedance. Linear regression analysis showed a significant positive correlation (r = .84; p < .0001) between the results of both techniques. However, plot analysis showed that, in comparison with bioelectrical impedance, skinfold measurements overestimate fat mass in the lower weight range and underestimate it in obese subjects. We conclude that the results of skinfold anthropometry and bioelectrical impedance are not comparable, especially in the extreme ranges of body fat. At the present time, other, more rigorous techniques are necessary to assess body composition accurately, in the extreme ranges of body fat in particular.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Assessment of body composition by bioelectrical impedance in a population aged greater than 60 yThe American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1990
- Methods for the assessment of human body composition: traditional and newThe American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1987
- Electrical Impedance: A New Technique to Assess Human Body CompositionMilitary Medicine, 1986
- Validation of tetrapolar bioelectrical impedance method to assess human body compositionJournal of Applied Physiology, 1986
- Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness: measurements on 481 men and women aged from 16 to 72 YearsBritish Journal of Nutrition, 1974