Original Article

Spinal Cord (2009) 47, 698–704; doi:10.1038/sc.2009.20; published online 17 March 2009;(2009) 0, 000–000.

Body composition assessment in athletes with spinal cord injury: comparison of field methods with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

M C Mojtahedi1, R J Valentine2 and E M Evans1,2

  1. 1Division of Nutritional Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA
  2. 2Department of Kinesiology and Community Health, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA

Correspondence: Dr EM Evans, Department of Kinesiology and Community Health, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 215 Freer Hall, 906 S Goodwin Ave, MC-052, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. E-mail: elevans@illinois.edu

Received 29 August 2008; Revised 29 December 2008; Accepted 6 February 2009; Published online 17 March 2009.

Top

Abstract

Study design:

 

Cross-sectional.

Objectives:

 

To compare relative body fatness (%Fat) estimates from field methods (skinfold thickness measurement (SKF) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)) with measures by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA).

Setting:

 

University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL, USA.

Methods:

 

Field methods used both three- and seven-site SKF prediction equations and BIA generalized, spinal cord injury (SCI)-specific and athlete-specific equations. DXA was used as the reference method. College-aged varsity athletes with SCI (women=8, men=8; time since injury 16.2plusminus5.7 years; injury level range T5–L5) were recruited.

Results:

 

Mean BMI was 20.8plusminus2.6 and 22.5plusminus2.1 kg m-2, and mean DXA %Fat was 31.9plusminus3.8 and 20.6plusminus8.4%, for women and men, respectively. All field methods under-predicted the %Fat when compared with DXA (ranges in mean differences: SKF women 2.9–8.2%, SKF men 6.9–12.4%; BIA women 0.5–3.9%, BIA men 0.3–7.0%). None of the field methods accurately predicted the %Fat compared with DXA (total error (TE): SKF women 7.4–12.1%, SKF men 8.4–15.2%; BIA women 5.1–9.3%, BIA men 6.7–10.7%). Of the SKF and BIA prediction equations, Evans et al.'s three-site SKF (r=0.95, P<0.001, standard error of the estimate (SEE)=2.8 %Fat) prediction equation provided the best fit for this population.

Conclusion:

 

Further studies with larger samples are necessary to develop appropriate prediction equations for field methods in the athletic SCI population.

Keywords:

body composition, fat, spinal cord injury, athletes

Extra navigation

.

naturejobs

More science jobs
Post a job for free
ADVERTISEMENT