Affiliation:
1. Sport Injury Prevention Group, International Chair of Kineanthropometry, UCAM Universidad Católica de Murcia, Murcia, Spain
2. Sport Injury Prevention Group, Facultad de Deporte, UCAM Universidad Católica de Murcia, Murcia, Murcia, Spain
3. Department of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Murcia, San Javier, Spain
Abstract
Introduction
The interest in estimating muscle mass (MM) and bone mass (BM) has grown in the sporting arena, and more specifically in recreational strength trainees, leading to the creation of different strategies to assess them. The aims were: 1) to investigate the agreement between different MM and BM formulas, and the muscle-bone index (MBI), and to establish the differences between them, in a healthy young adult population; and 2) to analyze if there are differences between males and females in the comparison of MM, BM and MBI formulas.
Methods
This study followed a descriptive cross-sectional design. A total of 130 adult active recreational strength trainees were evaluated according to the procedures described by the International Society for the Advancement in Kinanthropometry (ISAK). Estimations were made in kilograms of MM and BM by following the equations by different authors.
Results
The results showed significant differences between the values obtained by all the MM and BM formulas in the general sample (p < 0.001), and by the majority of formulas for male and female samples. In the general sample, Lin’s coefficient indicated a strong agreement between Kerr, Lee, and Poortmans’ MM estimation equations (concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) = 0.96–0.97). However, when stratifying by sex, this agreement persisted only in males (CCC = 0.90–0.94), in contrast with a lack of agreement observed in females (CCC < 0.90). Discrepancies in bone mass agreement were noted both in the general sample (CCC < 0.15) and when stratified by sex (CCC < 0.12).
Conclusions
In general, differences were found between the values reported by the MM and BM formulas in recreational strength trainees, without an agreement between them. Sex was shown to significantly influence the differences found. The practical implications are that when comparing an individual with reference tables, other studies, or if analyzing an individual’s evolution, the same estimation equation should be used, as they are not interchangeable.
Reference30 articles.
1. Body composition assessment in sports medicine. Statement of Spanish Group of Kinanthropometry of Spanish Federation of Sports Medicine;Alvero-Cruz;Archivos de Medicina del Deporte,2009
2. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults;American College of Sports Medicine position stand;Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise,2009
3. Anthropometric and body composition profile of young professional soccer players;Bernal-Orozco;Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,2020
4. Sex differences in body composition;Bredella;Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology,2017
5. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour;Bull;British Journal of Sports Medicine,2020
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献