Home > Riviste > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Fascicoli precedenti > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2004 Marzo;44(1) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2004 Marzo;44(1):38-43

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti

THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS

Rivista di Medicina, Traumatologia e Psicologia dello Sport


Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,111


eTOC

 

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


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

lingua: Inglese

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.

inizio pagina

Publication History

Per citare questo articolo

Corresponding author e-mail