Original Article | Published:

Body composition, energy expenditure and physical activity

Clinically applicable optical imaging technology for body size and shape analysis: comparison of systems differing in design

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 71, pages 13291335 (2017) | Download Citation

Abstract

Background/Objectives:

Recent advances have extended anthropometry beyond flexible tape measurements to automated three-dimensional optical devices that rapidly acquire hundreds of body surface dimensions. Three new devices were recently introduced that share in common inexpensive optical cameras. The design, and thus potential clinical applicability, of these systems differ substantially leading us to critically evaluate their accuracy and precision.

Subjects/Methods:

113 adult subjects completed evaluations by the three optical devices (KX-16 (16 stationary cameras), Proscanner (1 vertically oscillating camera), and Styku scanner (1 stationary camera)), air displacement plethysmography (ADP), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and a flexible tape measure. Optical measurements were compared to reference method estimates that included results acquired by flexible tape, DXA and ADP.

Results:

Optical devices provided respective circumference and regional volume estimates that overall were well-correlated with those obtained from flexible tape measurements (for example, hip circumference: R2, 0.91, 0.90, 0.96 for the KX-16, Proscanner, and Styku scanner, respectively) and DXA (for example, trunk volume: R2, 0.97, 0.97, and 0.98). Total body volumes measured by the optical devices were highly correlated with those from the ADP system (all R2s, 0.99). Coefficient of variations obtained from duplicate measurements (n, 55) were larger in optical than in reference measurements and significant (P<0.05) bias was present for some optical measurements relative to reference method estimates.

Conclusions:

Overall, the evaluated optical imaging systems differing in design provided body surface measurements that compared favorably with corresponding reference methods. However, our evaluations uncovered system measurement limitations, such as discrepancies in landmarking, that with correction have the potential to improve future developed devices.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , , , , , et al. Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry - Introduction. Who Tech Rep Ser 1995; 854: 1–3.

  2. 2.

    , . Anthropometry: continued refinements and new developments of an ancient method. Am J Clin Nutr 2017; 105: 1–2.

  3. 3.

    . Anthropometric Assessment of Nutritional Status. Wiley-Liss: New York, 1991.

  4. 4.

    . The Measurement of Human Growth. Croom Helm: London, 1984.

  5. 5.

    , . Body composition and morphological assessment of nutritional status in adults: a review of anthropometric variables. J Hum Nutr Diet 2016; 29: 7–25.

  6. 6.

    , . Anthropometry: The Individual and the Population.First ednvol. 14, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1994.

  7. 7.

    , , , , . Nutritional status: anthropometry. Euronut SENECA investigators. Eur J Clin Nutr 1991; 45: 31–42.

  8. 8.

    , , . Anthropometric Standardization Reference Manual. Human Kinetics Books: Champaign, IL, 1988.

  9. 9.

    . Anthropometric Standards for the Assessment of Growth and Nutritional Status. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, 1990.

  10. 10.

    , , , . Head circumference reference data: birth to 18 years. Pediatrics 1987; 79: 706–712.

  11. 11.

    , , , , , . Anthropometric equations for studying body fat in pregnant women. Am J Clin Nutr 1998; 67: 104–110.

  12. 12.

    , , , , , . Changes in energy expenditure, anthropometry, and energy intake during the course of pregnancy and lactation in well-nourished Indian women. Am J Clin Nutr 1995; 61: 501–513.

  13. 13.

    , , . An overview of the current three-dimensional body scanners for anthropometric data collection. In:, , , , , et al(eds) Occupational Safety and Hygiene III. CRC Press: Taylor & Francis Group: London, 2015; pp 149–154.

  14. 14.

    , , , . Visual representation of body shape in African-American and European American women: clinical considerations. Clin Med Insights Womens Health 2016; 9 , 63–70.

  15. 15.

    , , . Reliability and repeatability of 3-D body scanner (LASS) measurements compared to anthropometry. Ann Hum Biol 1994; 21: 571–577.

  16. 16.

    , , , , , et al. Automated anthropometric phenotyping with novel Kinect-based three-dimensional imaging method: comparison with a reference laser imaging system. Eur J Clin Nutr 2016; 70: 475–481.

  17. 17.

    , , , , , et al. Accurate body composition measures from whole-body silhouettes. Med Phys 2015; 42: 4668–4677.

  18. 18.

    , , , , . Clinical anthropometrics and body composition from 3D whole-body surface scans. Eur J Clin Nutr 2016; 70: 1265–1270.

  19. 19.

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS)National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES): Anthropometry Procedures Manual. In: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (eds)Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2007.

  20. 20.

    Method for registration of 3-D shapes. Proc. SPIE 1611, Sensor Fusion IV: Control Paradigms and Data Structures; April 30, 1992; Boston, MA, USA 1992.

  21. 21.

    KinectFusion: real-time 3D reconstruction and interaction using a moving depth camera. 24th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology; Oct. 16, 2011. ACM, 2011.

  22. 22.

    , , . Poisson surface reconstruction. In: , (eds). Eurographics Symposium on Geometry Processing. The Eurographics Association: Cagliari, Sardinia, 2006, pp 61–70.

  23. 23.

    . An efficient algorithm for determining the convex hull of a finite planar set. Inf Process Lett 1972; 1: 132–133.

  24. 24.

    , , , , , et al. Scaling of adult regional body mass and body composition as a whole to height: relevance to body shape and body mass index. Am J Hum Biol 2015; 27: 372–379.

  25. 25.

    , , , , , et al. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry-based body volume measurement for 4-compartment body composition. Am J Clin Nutr 2012; 95: 25–31.

  26. 26.

    , . Evaluation of factors determining the precision of body composition measurements by air displacement plethysmography. Eur J Clin Nutr 2003; 57: 770–776.

  27. 27.

    , , . Critical appraisal of the estimation of body composition via two-, three-, and four-compartment models. Am J Hum Biol 1999; 11: 175–185.

  28. 28.

    Resolving multipath interference in kinect: An inverse problem approach. IEEE Sensors 2014. IEEE, 2014.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the input provided by optical device manufacturers on the operational details of their respective systems. This work was partially supported by two National Institutes of Health NORC Center Grants P30DK072476, Pennington/Louisiana; and P30DK040561, Harvard; and R01DK109008, Shape UP! Adults.

Author contributions

BB, CRS, LR, XL, BKN, JAS and SBH analyzed the data and drafted the manuscript; BB, DL, CRS, LR, JAS and SBH designed the study; BB, DL, CRS and SBH directed implementation and data collection; BB, DL, CRS and LR collected the data; LR, JAS and SBH provided necessary logistical support; BB, DL, CRS, LR, XL, BKN, JAS and SBH edited the manuscript for intellectual content and provided critical comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Metabolism and Body Composition, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

    • B Bourgeois
    • , D Latimer
    •  & S B Heymsfield
  2. School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

    • B Bourgeois
    • , C R Stannard
    • , L Romeo
    • , X Li
    •  & S B Heymsfield
  3. Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA

    • B K Ng
    •  & J A Shepherd
  4. Graduate Program in Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

    • B K Ng

Authors

  1. Search for B Bourgeois in:

  2. Search for B K Ng in:

  3. Search for D Latimer in:

  4. Search for C R Stannard in:

  5. Search for L Romeo in:

  6. Search for X Li in:

  7. Search for J A Shepherd in:

  8. Search for S B Heymsfield in:

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S B Heymsfield.

Supplementary information

Word documents

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Material

About this article

Publication history

Received

Revised

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2017.142

Supplementary Information accompanies this paper on European Journal of Clinical Nutrition website (http://www.nature.com/ejcn)

Further reading