피지후법과 생체전기저항법에 의한 고령자의 신체구성 평가

Assesment of body fat percentage by dual x-ray absorptiometry, bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold in the Korean elderly

신체구성의 정확한 평가는 임상 및 운동관련 연구 등 많은 분야에서 필요하다. 다양한 비침습방법들이 이러한 연구에 이용되고 있다본. 연구의 목적은 피지후(SF)법과 생체전기저항(BI)법에 의한 노인의 체지방률 측정의 타당도를 검증하는 것이다. 남녀 노인 모두 이중에너지 X-선 흡수법(DXA)으로 측정한 체지방률값과 SF법(r=.829) 및 BI법(r=.948)으로 구한 체지방 측정치 사이에 유의한 상관관계가 있었으며, BI법과 SF법의 체지방률의 추정표준오차는 각각 2.2%, 4.6%이었다. 그러나 SF로 측정한 체지방률의 표준추정오차가 4% 이상으로 DXA 측정치와 차이가 있었다. 남녀 노인 모두에게서 SF로 측정한 체지방률의 정확성이 BI로 측정한 것보다 낮았다. 따라서 두 방법 모두 노인의 체지방률을 측정할 수 있는 방법이라 할 수 있으나, 한국인 고령자의 %BF을 측정하는데 BI법이 비교적 더욱 정확한 측정법이라 할 수 있다. 피지후법을 사용할 경우에는 한국인 고령자용 추정식을 개발할 필요가 있다.

Accurate assessments of body composition are needed in many areas of exercise-related studies including clinical assessment and obesity-related research. A variety of non-invasive methods have been applied for these studies. The purpose of this investigation was to compare body composition measurement in elderly people by using non-invasive methods (skinfold thicknesses and bioelectrical impedance analysis [BIA]) with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The fat-free body mass (FFM), fat body mass (FM), and percent body fat (%BF) were measured by the dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), skinflod (SF) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BI) techniques. %BF estimated by BI(r=.948) and SF(r=0.829) were significantly correlated with the data from DXA in both sexes. The standard error of estimate (SEE) of %BF for both BI and SF were 2.2% and 4.6%, respectively. The accuracy of %BF estimated by the SF method was slightly lower than that for the BI method in both sexes. From these results, it is concluded that %BF can be estimated by each method without a large discrepancy. However, the validity of each method for estimating %BF may not be as high as other reference methods. BI has high validity coefficients, so BI will be useful to estimate %BF of the Korean elderly. Further research is necessary for improvement of the SF method s prediction accuracy. were high validity coefficients(r=.948 and .849, for BI and SF, respectively) with the %BF measured by DXA. However, %BF estimated by the SF were significantly different from the results of DXA, showing a SEE of 4% or over. The accuracy of %BF estimated by the SF.