Reliability and Validity of NX-16 3D Body Scanner

Abstract

SUMMARY: 3D body scanning technology is nowadays widely available and used in various research on body morphology and anatomical structure. The present study investigated the reliability and validity of NX-16 (TC2) 3D body scanner with a method of classical anthropometry. Research was carried out on 31 participants (17 males and 14 females) with their age 22.1±4.63 years, their height 177.17±8.96 cm and their weight 72.36±13.6 kg. Left (L) -Right (R) upper arm girth, L -R elbow girth, L -R forearm girth, L -R wrist girth, L -R thigh girth, L -R knee girth and L -R calf girth were measured with a flexible and inextensible tape with a 1 mm accuracy, and with the 3D measurement technique. The results show a good agreement between both methods used with paired variables showing significant and very strong correlations with more than 90 % of shared variance; Bland-Altman plot also shows a high agreement; paired sample T-test significance was observed in most cases; no significant differences were observed in measurements of right wrist girth, left thigh girth, left knee girth and in left calf girth. NX-16 3D body scanner thus represents a valid and highly accurate tool for assessing human body dimensions. However, the 3D body scanning and classical anthropometry method cannot be regarded as interchangeable due to the different initial positions of the body in the implementation of measurement protocols. For the direct comparison of 3D scanning and the classical anthropometry method in the future, the same body starting position should be used as is held during the 3D scanning process.

Body Asymmetries in Young Male Road Cyclists

“…Anthropometry is considered to be one of the most classical methods for assessing the dimensions of body segments (Heyward & Wagner, 2004), and has been often used in road cycling (Zaton et al, 2014;Iriberri et al, 2008). But nowadays, methods for obtaining anthropometric body data have become more practical, contactless, fast, and, above all, accurate since the introduction and application of 3D body scanners (Simmons & Istook, 2003;Simenko & Cuk, 2016). A construction and comparison of composite shape models represents an additional advantage of 3D scanning.…”

Test–retest repeatability of the NX-16: a three-dimensional (3D) body scanner in a male cohort

“…To date, few studies have investigated the test-retest repeatability of the NX-16 scanner, previous relevant studies are summarised in Table 2. Studies that have directly investigated the NX-16 scanner have demonstrated good agreement between the scanner and traditional methods [9,13]. For example, mean differences in circumference measurements were < 1.0 cm for multiple measurement locations (arms, thigh, and calf) when compared with traditional tape measure methods [13].…”

“…Studies that have directly investigated the NX-16 scanner have demonstrated good agreement between the scanner and traditional methods [9,13]. For example, mean differences in circumference measurements were < 1.0 cm for multiple measurement locations (arms, thigh, and calf) when compared with traditional tape measure methods [13]. Investigation of similar devices also reports relatively low differences between automated and manual measures (waist 0.64 cm) [7].…”

“…The NX-16 body scanner has been described previously [13]. The scanner was connected to a desktop PC running Windows XP and utilised specialist software (3D Body Measurement System V2.1, TC2, Cary, North Carolina, USA).…”

“…The validity of the NX-16 scanner has been investigated previously comparing values obtained with the criterion method of a flexible tape measure [7]. The NX-16 scanner has good validity for various measurement sites including the thigh, arms, chest, and waist [9,13]. However, there is limited data available relating to the repeatability of the NX-16 over multiple testing sessions.…”