Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2004 March;44(1) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2004 March;44(1):38-43

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS

A Journal on Applied Physiology, Biomechanics, Preventive Medicine,
Sports Medicine and Traumatology, Sports Psychology


Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,215


eTOC

 

Original articles  BODY COMPOSITION, SPORT NUTRITION AND SUPPLEMENT (ERGOGENICS)


The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2004 March;44(1):38-43

Copyright © 2009 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Multicompartment model to assess body composition in professional water polo players

Andreoli A. 1, Melchiorri G. 1, Volpe S. L. 2, Sardella F. 3, Iacopino L. 1, De Lorenzo A. 1

1 Human Nutrition Unit University of Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy 2 Department of Nutrition University of Massachuttes, Amherst, USA 3 Comitato Olimpico Nazionale Italiano (“CONI”), Rome, Italy


PDF  


Aim. The aim of ­this ­study was to com­pare dif­fer­ences ­between skin­fold thick­nesses (SK), bio­electrical impe­dance anal­ysis (BIA), a 2-com­part­ment ­model (2C), and 2, 3-com­part­ment ­models (3C) of per­cent ­body fat (%BF) assess­ment ­with a 4-com­part­ment ­model (4C) in pro­fes­sional ­water ­polo ath­letes.
­Methods. Ten ­male sub­jects, 18 to 29 ­years of age, par­tic­i­pated in ­this ­study. ­Under ­water ­weighing, deu­te­rium dilu­tion, and ­dual-­energy X-ray absorp­tiom­etry (DXA) ­were ­used to pro­vide the ­required ­values for the ­models. The two, 3C ­models ­used ­were estab­lished by ­Withers et al. (3C-W) and by the DXA man­u­fac­turers (3C-DXA). 4C was ­also estab­lished by ­Withers et al.
­Results. ­There ­were no sig­nif­i­cant dif­fer­ences ­between 2C, 3C-W, and 3C-DXA ­when com­pared ­with 4C (cri­terion ­model). ­There ­were no sig­nif­i­cant dif­fer­ences ­between 2C and 3C-W. %BF was sig­nif­i­cantly ­greater ­using 2C com­pared ­with 3C-DXA. %BF ­derived ­from SK and BIA ­were sig­nif­i­cantly ­greater ­than all ­other ­methods. 4C was ­best cor­re­lated ­with 3C-W (R2=0.998), fol­lowed by 2C (R2=0.806), 3C-DXA (R2=0.5071), SK (R2=0.2945), and BIA (R2=0.2377).
Con­clu­sion. We con­clude ­that 2C and 3C-W ­assess %BF ­equally as ­well as 4C; how­ever, SK and BIA sig­nif­i­cantly ­over-esti­mated %BF in ­water ­polo ath­letes.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail