• J Athl Train · Jan 2011

    Comparative Study

    Subcutaneous thigh fat assessment: a comparison of skinfold calipers and ultrasound imaging.

    • Noelle M Selkow, Brian G Pietrosimone, and Susan A Saliba.
    • University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. nmp4p@virginia.edu
    • J Athl Train. 2011 Jan 1; 46 (1): 50-4.

    ContextSkinfold calipers (SC) typically are used to determine subcutaneous fat thicknesses. Identifying the exact separation of muscle and fat can complicate measurements. Ultrasound imaging (USI) might provide a better technique for analyzing subcutaneous fat thicknesses.ObjectiveTo compare measurements from SC and USI in assessing subcutaneous thigh fat thickness.DesignDescriptive laboratory study.SettingLaboratory.Patients And Other ParticipantsTwenty healthy adults (13 men, 7 women; age  =  26.9 ± 5.4 years, height  =  173.9 ± 7.3 cm, mass  =  77.4 ± 16.1 kg) participated.Intervention(S)Participants were seated in 90° of knee flexion and 85° of trunk extension. A standardized template was used to identify measurement sites over the vastus medialis obliquus (VMO), distal rectus femoris (dRF), proximal rectus femoris (pRF), and vastus lateralis (VL). Three measurements at each of the 4 sites were made in random order and were averaged for each measurement tool by the same investigator.Main Outcome Measure(S)Fat thickness was measured in millimeters with SC and USI. Measurements at each site were compared using Pearson product moment correlations and Bland-Altman plots.ResultsStrong correlations between measures were found at the VMO (r  =  .90, P < .001), dRF (r  =  .93, P < .001), pRF (r  =  .93, P < .001), and VL (r  =  .91, P < .001). Mean differences between measures ranged from 1.7 ± 2.4 mm (dRF) to 3.7 ± 2.6 mm (pRF), indicating that the SC resulted in larger thicknesses compared with USI. Limits of agreement, as illustrated by the Bland-Altman plots, were fairly wide at each site: from -3.38 mm to 7.74 mm at the VMO, from -3.04 mm to 6.52 mm at the dRF, from -1.53 mm to 8.87 mm at the pRF, and from -3.73 mm to 8.15 mm at the VL. All plots except for the VL demonstrated increasing overestimation via the SC as fat thicknesses increased.ConclusionsWe found strong correlations between the SC and USI; however, the large limits of agreement and increasing mean differences with larger fat thicknesses were a concern in terms of using this tool. When measuring subcutaneous fat thickness of the thigh, SC tended to overestimate thickness in individuals with higher fat values.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.