Positional Analysis of Body Composition Using Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Football and Men's Lacrosse.

ABSTRACT: Zabriskie, HA, Dobrosielski, DA, Leppert, KM, Droege, AJ, Knuth, ND, and Lisman, PJ. Positional analysis of body composition using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I football and men's lacrosse. J Strength Cond Res 36(6): 1699-1707, 2022-Despite the widespread use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), few studies have examined differences in body composition between positions within sports and none have reported DXA-derived body composition reference values for men's lacrosse. The purpose of this study was to examine differences in measures of total and regional body composition and bone mineral density (BMD) using DXA across sport positions in a large cohort of National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I male lacrosse and football players. A total of 294 male athletes (football, n = 196; lacrosse, n = 98) underwent DXA. One-way analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to examine whether body composition variables differed by sports position. In football, position was a significant determinant for every compositional variable in football athletes (all, p < 0.05; effect size range = 0.24-0.79). Offensive linemen had the highest total body fat percentage (30.1 ± 2.9%), followed by fullbacks (26.7 ± 3.3%) and defensive linemen (24.6 ± 5.7%); wide receivers had the lowest (14.5 ± 2.1%). For total body BMD, defensive linemen had the highest (1.70 ± 0.09 g·cm-3), followed by linebackers (1.67 ± 0.09 g·cm-3) and offensive linemen (1.65 ± 0.09 g·cm-3); kickers had the lowest (1.45 ± 0.11 g·cm-3) BMD. In lacrosse, no differences were found between positions for any total or regional body composition and BMD measure (all, p > 0.05). Our data confirm that total and regional measures of body composition and BMD vary across positions in football but not in men's lacrosse. Unlike football, similarities in body composition among lacrosse players may indicate that the uniformity of training demands or preferred player attributes in team selection outweigh the unique positional demands in gameplay.

Body Composition Values of NCAA Division 1 Female Athletes Derived From Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry.

ABSTRACT: Dobrosielski, DA, Leppert, KM, Knuth, ND, Wilder, JN, Kovacs, L, and Lisman, PJ. Body composition values of NCAA Division 1 female athletes derived from dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. J Strength Cond Res 35(10): 2886-2893, 2021-This study generated descriptive data for regional and total body composition and bone mineral density (BMD) measures using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) across 12 NCAA Division 1 female competitive sports. Two hundred seventy-eight female collegiate athletes underwent DXA: basketball (BB; n = 28), cross country (CC = 11), field hockey (FH; n = 35), gymnastics (GYM; n = 23), lacrosse (LAX; n = 48), soccer (SOC; CC = 27), softball (SB; n = 24), swimming and diving (SW; n = 35), tennis (TN; n = 11), track and field ([TR-throw; n = 10]; [TR-run; n = 10]), and volleyball (VB; n = 16). Descriptive statistics for all body composition and BMD measures were calculated. Group mean differences in all regional and total body composition (all, p < 0.001; η2 range = 0.177-0.365) and BMD (all, p < 0.001; η2 range = 0.317-0.383) measures were observed between teams. The total BF% for gymnasts (23.5%) was lower than TN, FH, LAX, SB, and TR-throw (mean difference range: -4.6 to -12.9%, all p < 0.01); TR-throw had the highest total BF% (36.4%). Cross country had lower total BMD (1.17 g·cm-2) than FH, TR-throw, LAX, GYM, SOC, SB, VB, and BB (mean difference range: -0.12 to -0.26 g·cm-2, all p < 0.01); BB and TR-throw had the highest total BMD (1.40 and 1.43 g·cm-2, respectively). Our data confirm that regional and total body composition and BMD measures varied across female collegiate sports. These findings may assist sports medicine and strength and conditioning practitioners with identifying sport-specific goal values for BF% and BMD to optimize program design.