Journal
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
Volume 75, Issue 3, Pages 453-467Publisher
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/75.3.453
Keywords
body-composition methods; air-displacement plethysmography; hydrostatic weighing; dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; isotopic dilution; total body water; multicompartment body-composition models; thoracic gas volume; residual lung volume; review
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Laboratory-based body-composition techniques include hydrostatic weighing (HW), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), measurement of total body water (TBW) by isotope dilution, measurement of total body potassium, and multicompartment models. Although these reference methods are used routinely, each has inherent practical limitations. Whole-body air-displacement plethysmography is a new practical alternative to these more traditional body-composition methods. We reviewed the principal findings from studies published between December 1995 and August 2001 that compared the BOD POD method (Life Measurement, Inc, Concord, CA) with reference methods and summarized factors contributing to the different study findings. The average of the study means indicates that the BOD POD and HW agree within 1% body fat (BF) for adults and children, whereas the BOD POD and DXA agree within 1% BF for adults and 2% BF fur children. Few studies have compared the BOD POD with multicompartment models; those that have suggest a similar average underestimation of approximate to2-3% BF by both the BOD POD and HW. Individual variations between 2-compartment models compared with DXA and 4-compartment models are partly attributable to deviations from the assumed chemical composition of the body. Wide variations among study means, -4.0% to 1.9% BF for BOD POD - HW and -3.0% to t.7% BF for BOD POD - DXA, are likely due in part to differences in laboratory equipment, study design, and subject characteristics and in some cases to failure to follow the manufacturer's recommended protocol. Wide intersubject variations between methods are partly attributed to technical precision and biological error but to a large extent remain unexplained. On the basis of this review, future research goals are suggested.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available