ABSTRACT
For elite athletes, monitoring body composition is important for maximizing performance without health risks. Amplitude (A)-mode ultrasound (AUS) has attracted increasing attention as an alternative to skinfold thickness measurements commonly used for assessing the amount of body fat in athletes. AUS accuracy and precision, however, depend on the formula used to predict body fat percentage (%BF) from subcutaneous fat layer thicknesses. Therefore, this study evaluates the accuracy of the 1-point biceps (B1), 9-sites Parrillo, 3-sites Jackson and Pollock (JP3), and 7-sites Jackson and Pollock (JP7) formulas. Relying on the previous validation of the JP3 formula in college-aged male athletes, we took AUS measurements in 54 professional soccer players (aged 22.9 ± 3.83 y, mean ± SD) and compared the results given by different formulas. The Kruskal-Wallis test indicated significant differences (p < 10-6), and Conover's post hoc test revealed that the JP3 and JP7 data come from the same distribution, whereas the data given by B1 and P9 differ from all the others. Lin's concordance correlation coefficients for B1 vs. JP7, P9 vs. JP7, and JP3 vs. JP7 were 0.464, 0.341, and 0.909, respectively. The Bland-Altman analysis indicated mean differences of -0.5 %BF between JP3 and JP7, 4.7 %BF between P9 and JP7, and 3.1 %BF between B1 and JP7. This study suggests that JP7 and JP3 are equally valid, whereas P9 and B1 overestimate %BF in athletes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Several studies have addressed the validity of ultrasound (US) for body composition assessment, but few have evaluated its reliability. This study aimed to determine the reliability of percent body fat (%BF) estimates using A-mode US in a heterogeneous sample. SUBJECTS/METHODS: A group of 144 healthy adults (81 men and 63 women), 30.4 (10.1) years (mean (SD)), BMI 24.6 (4.7) kg/m2, completed 6 consecutive measurements of the subcutaneous fat layer thickness at 8 anatomical sites. The measurements were done, alternatively, by two testers, using a BodyMetrix™ instrument. To compute %BF, 4 formulas from the BodyView™ software were applied: 7-sites Jackson and Pollock, 3-sites Jackson and Pollock, 3-sites Pollock, and 1-point biceps. RESULTS: The formula with the most anatomic sites provided the best reliability quantified by the following measures: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.979 for Tester 1 (T1) and 0.985 for T2, technical error of measurement (TEM) = 1.07% BF for T1 and 0.89% BF for T2, and minimal detectable change (MDC) = 2.95% BF for T1, and 2.47% BF for T2. The intertester bias was -0.5% BF, whereas the intertester ICC was 0.972. The intertester MDC was 3.43% BF for the entire sample, 3.24% BF for men, and 3.65% BF for women. CONCLUSIONS: A-mode US is highly reliable for %BF assessments, but it is more precise for men than for women. Examiner performance is a source of variability that needs to be mitigated to further improve the precision of this technique.
