Portable A‐Mode Ultrasound for Body Composition Assessment in Adolescents

Objectives Ultrasound (US) imaging is a low‐cost, highly feasible alternative method for monitoring the nutritional status of a population; however, only a few studies have tested the body composition agreement between US and reference standard methods, especially in adolescents. The purposes of thi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of ultrasound in medicine 2016-04, Vol.35 (4), p.755-760
Hauptverfasser: Ripka, Wagner Luis, Ulbricht, Leandra, Menghin, Lucas, Gewehr, Pedro Miguel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objectives Ultrasound (US) imaging is a low‐cost, highly feasible alternative method for monitoring the nutritional status of a population; however, only a few studies have tested the body composition agreement between US and reference standard methods, especially in adolescents. The purposes of this study were to assess the agreement of portable US with a reference standard method, dual‐energy x‐ray absorptiometry (DXA), for body fat percentage (BF%) in adolescents and to verify whether the use of a new mathematical model, based on the anatomic thickness obtained by US, is capable of improving BF% prediction. Methods This research was a descriptive study. Measures of total body mass, BF% on DXA, and BF% on US were collected from 105 adolescents. Results The participants included 71 male adolescents (median age ± interquartile range, 14.0 ± 2.0 years) and 34 female adolescents (13.0 ± 2.3 years). Ultrasound yielded significantly lower BF% values than DXA for male (mean ± SD, US, 9.6% ± 6.6%; DXA, 20.0% ± 7.2%; R= 0.848; P< .05) and female (US, 22.5% ± 5.7%; DXA, 30.3% ± 4.9%; R = 0.495; P < .05) participants. In addition, Bland‐Altman analysis showed low concordance. When a multivariate regression was tested, the results improved for both sexes (US, 20.3% ± 4.6%; R= 0.848; P= .503) and female participants (US, 29.0% ± 5.7%; R = 0.712; P = .993) with a standard estimate of error of 1.57%. Conclusions This study has shown that US applied in a specific regression for BF% prediction in adolescents has a strong correlation with DXA as well as concordance with Bland‐Altman analysis.
ISSN:0278-4297
1550-9613
DOI:10.7863/ultra.15.02026