Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Utility of ultrasound for body fat assessment: validity and reliability compared to a multicompartment criterion.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Smith-Ryan, AE; Blue, MNM; Trexler, ET; Hirsch, KR
Published in: Clinical physiology and functional imaging
March 2018

Measurement of body composition to assess health risk and prevention is expanding. Accurate portable techniques are needed to facilitate use in clinical settings. This study evaluated the accuracy and repeatability of a portable ultrasound (US) in comparison with a four-compartment criterion for per cent body fat (%Fat) in overweight/obese adults. Fifty-one participants (mean ± SD; age: 37·2 ± 11·3 years; BMI: 31·6 ± 5·2 kg m-2 ) were measured for %Fat using US (GE Logiq-e) and skinfolds. A subset of 36 participants completed a second day of the same measurements, to determine reliability. US and skinfold %Fat were calculated using the seven-site Jackson-Pollock equation. The Wang 4C model was used as the criterion method for %Fat. Compared to a gold standard criterion, US %Fat (36·4 ± 11·8%; P = 0·001; standard error of estimate [SEE] = 3·5%) was significantly higher than the criterion (33·0 ± 8·0%), but not different than skinfolds (35·3 ± 5·9%; P = 0·836; SEE = 4·5%). US resulted in good reliability, with no significant differences from Day 1 (39·95 ± 15·37%) to Day 2 (40·01 ± 15·42%). Relative consistency was 0·96, and standard error of measure was 0·94%. Although US overpredicted %Fat compared to the criterion, a moderate SEE for US is suggestive of a practical assessment tool in overweight individuals. %Fat differences reported from these field-based techniques are less than reported by other single-measurement laboratory methods and therefore may have utility in a clinical setting. This technique may also accurately track changes.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Clinical physiology and functional imaging

DOI

EISSN

1475-097X

ISSN

1475-0961

Publication Date

March 2018

Volume

38

Issue

2

Start / End Page

220 / 226

Related Subject Headings

  • Ultrasonography
  • Skinfold Thickness
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Physiology
  • Obesity
  • Models, Biological
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Smith-Ryan, A. E., Blue, M. N. M., Trexler, E. T., & Hirsch, K. R. (2018). Utility of ultrasound for body fat assessment: validity and reliability compared to a multicompartment criterion. Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging, 38(2), 220–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpf.12402
Smith-Ryan, Abbie E., Malia N. M. Blue, Eric T. Trexler, and Katie R. Hirsch. “Utility of ultrasound for body fat assessment: validity and reliability compared to a multicompartment criterion.Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging 38, no. 2 (March 2018): 220–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpf.12402.
Smith-Ryan AE, Blue MNM, Trexler ET, Hirsch KR. Utility of ultrasound for body fat assessment: validity and reliability compared to a multicompartment criterion. Clinical physiology and functional imaging. 2018 Mar;38(2):220–6.
Smith-Ryan, Abbie E., et al. “Utility of ultrasound for body fat assessment: validity and reliability compared to a multicompartment criterion.Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging, vol. 38, no. 2, Mar. 2018, pp. 220–26. Epmc, doi:10.1111/cpf.12402.
Smith-Ryan AE, Blue MNM, Trexler ET, Hirsch KR. Utility of ultrasound for body fat assessment: validity and reliability compared to a multicompartment criterion. Clinical physiology and functional imaging. 2018 Mar;38(2):220–226.
Journal cover image

Published In

Clinical physiology and functional imaging

DOI

EISSN

1475-097X

ISSN

1475-0961

Publication Date

March 2018

Volume

38

Issue

2

Start / End Page

220 / 226

Related Subject Headings

  • Ultrasonography
  • Skinfold Thickness
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Physiology
  • Obesity
  • Models, Biological
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans