Comparison of ultrasonography and skinfold measurements of subcutaneous fat thickness in the evaluation of body composition

Akyer, Şahika Pınar; Adıgüzel, Esat; Sabir, Nuran; Akdoğan, Ilgaz; Yılmaz, Birsen; Yonguç, Gökşin Nilüfer

doi:10.2399/ana.14.037

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This observation is in line with the results from previous studies. Akyer et al [ 19 ] also demonstrated higher results of the skinfold thickness measurements taken using a caliper, as well as a very high correlation between the results of the calf skinfold measurements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Skinfold Thickness Measured by Caliper and Ultrasound Scanner in Normative Weight Women

Lewandowski

Dychała

Pisula-Lewandowska

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Obesity is a major issue affecting not only adults but also children in many places of the world. There are numerous methods for estimating the body fat percentage, however, all of those methods are different in terms of availability, accuracy, and the cost of an individual examination. The aim of this study was to compare two relatively easy and widespread measurement methods for assessing skinfold thickness: the BodyMetrix BX2000 ultrasound machine and a classic GPM caliper. Fifty-eight young women aged 19–24 years with normative body weight participated in the study. We found that although the measurements performed by both methods are positively correlated, the obtained values were different. In seven out of nine measured points, these differences were statistically significant. The measurements of skin fat folds with a caliper showed a higher value of subcutaneous tissue compared to ultrasound measurements. Only the values of measurements on the pectoral and mid-axillary did not differ between the methods. We conclude that due to the significant discrepancies in the values of measured skinfold thickness, appropriate measurement tools and dedicated formulas estimating the amount of body fat should be used.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Skinfold Thickness Measured by Caliper and Ultrasound Scanner in Normative Weight Women

Lewandowski

Dychała

Pisula-Lewandowska

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the methods that is closest to meeting these parameters is ultrasound. Previous ultrasound research has used B-mode (brightness-mode) for diagnostic imaging at varying frequencies, from 3 to 22 MHz, in order to compare ultrasound with other methods by obtaining an image of subcutaneous fat [7,10,12–18]. However, the significant economic costs and the need for software that depends on interpretation by highly-specialized professionals have prevented the use of these devices in most contexts [19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing subcutaneous adipose tissue by simple and portable field instruments: Skinfolds versus A-mode ultrasound measurements

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study compared subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) measurements using a skinfold caliper and Renco Lean-Meater Series 12 A-mode portable ultrasound scanner (A-US). It aimed to assess their inter- and intra-rater reliability and measure the agreement between both methods.MethodsEighty-four volunteers of different fitness levels were divided into three groups by Ʃ6 skinfolds: G1 ≤ 55 mm (n = 33 males); G2 > 55 mm (n = 32 males); G3 = 98.0 ± 52.3 mm (n = 19 females). Triceps, subscapular, biceps, iliac crest, supraspinal, abdominal, front thigh and medial calf were assessed by ultrasound and skinfolds. Two technicians for both tools performed triplicate measures. Intraclass correlation (ICC), technical error of measurement (TEM) and coefficients of variation (CVs) were applied for test-retest and inter-rater reliability. Non-Parametric statistics were used in order to establish possible statistical differences and correlation between skinfolds thickness and uncompressed subcutaneous adipose tissue thickness from ultrasound. The amount of agreement between both methods was assessed with Lin’s coefficient and a scatterplot of all site locations. A Bland-Altman plot was constructed to establish limits of agreement between groups and regression analysis was employed to assess the ability of skinfolds to explain the variance of ultrasound.ResultsTest-retest ICC for skinfolds and ultrasound were higher than 0.989 and 0.793, respectively. Inter-rater ICC for skinfolds was 0.999 with a 95% CI of 0.995 to 0.999 and for ultrasound was 0.755 with a much larger 95% CI of 0.622 to 0.841. TEMs (> 8.50%) and CVs (> 6.72%) compromised ultrasound reliability. Statistical differences were found in most of the analysed anatomical sites (p < 0.001) except in biceps G2 (Z = -1.150, p = 0.25) and G3 (Z = -1.309, p = 0.19). Good correlations (r > 0.7, p ≤ 0.05) were reported at almost all anatomical sites and groups except for biceps (G1: Rho = 0.26, p = 0.140) and abdominal (G2: Rho = -0.16, p = 0.38; G3: Rho = 0.43, p = 0.068). Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient registered low values of agreement between skinfolds and A-mode ultrasound (ranged from—0.009–0.646). The scatterplot and the estimated regression line drawn through the midst of all anatomical sites of the whole sample had a slope of 0.51 and R2 adjusted = 0.62 was obtained. The combined analysis between the Bland-Altman plot and the linear regression showed that specifically in the G2 and G3 groups, as the SAT increases the differences between skinfolds and ultrasounds measurements also increases.ConclusionsThe Renco Lean-Meater ultrasound is not interchangeable with skinfold measures. Its utility is questionable, particularly for assessing SAT in active adult populations. Its poor test-retest and inter-rater reliability as well as the lack of agreement when compared to the skinfolds would exclude the free use of the A-mode ultrasound scanner in its hypothetical replacing of the classical calipers.

show abstract

Measurement of subcutaneous fat tissue: reliability and comparison of caliper and ultrasound via systematic body mapping

Hoffmann

Thiele

Kwast

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Caliper and ultrasound (US) are used to measure subcutaneous fat tissue depth (SFT) and then to calculate total body fat. There is no evidence-based recommendation as to whether caliper or US are equally accurate. The aim of this paper was therefore to compare reliability of both methods. In this methodical study, 54 participants (BMI: 24.8 ± 3.5 kg/m2; Age: 43.2 ± 21.7 years) were included. Using systematic body mapping, the SFT of 56 areas was measured. We also analyzed 4 body sites via MRI. A comparison between caliper and US detected clear differences in mean SFT of all areas (0.83 ± 0.33 cm vs. 1.14 ± 0.54 cm; p < 0.001) showing moderate reliability (ICC 0.669, 95%CI: 0.625–0.712). US and MRI revealed in the abdominal area a SFT twice as thick as caliper (2.43 ± 1.36 cm vs. 2.26 ± 1.32 cm vs. 1.15 ± 0.66 cm; respectively). Caliper and US revealed excellent intrarater (ICC caliper: 0.944, 95%CI: 0.926–0.963; US: 0.934, 95%CI: 0.924–0.944) and good interrater reliability (ICC caliper: 0.794, 95%CI: 0.754–0.835; US: 0.825, 95%CI: 0.794–0.857). Despite the high reliability in measuring SFT that caliper and US show, our comparison of the two methods yielded clear differences in SFT, particularly in the abdominal area. In accuracy terms, US is preferable for most mapping areas.

show abstract

Comparison of ultrasonography and skinfold measurements of subcutaneous fat thickness in the evaluation of body composition

Cited by 5 publications

References 13 publications

Comparison of Skinfold Thickness Measured by Caliper and Ultrasound Scanner in Normative Weight Women

Comparison of Skinfold Thickness Measured by Caliper and Ultrasound Scanner in Normative Weight Women

Assessing subcutaneous adipose tissue by simple and portable field instruments: Skinfolds versus A-mode ultrasound measurements

Measurement of subcutaneous fat tissue: reliability and comparison of caliper and ultrasound via systematic body mapping

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About