New Multisite Bioelectrical Impedance Device Compared to Hydrostatic Weighing and Skinfold Body Fat Methods

Authors

Andrew D. Wells, University of New MexicoFollow
Bryanne N. Bellovary, SUNY CortlandFollow
Jonathan M. Houck, University of New MexicoFollow
Jeremy B. Ducharme, University of New MexicoFollow
Abdulaziz Abdulrahman A. Masoud, University of New MexicoFollow
Ann L. Gibson, University of New MexicoFollow
Christine M. Mermier, University of New MexicoFollow

Abstract

International Journal of Exercise Science 13(4): 1718-1728, 2020. The purpose of this study was to compare the Skulpt Chisel™ to seven-site skinfold (SKF) and hydrostatic weighing (HW) body fat percentage (%BF) estimates. Twenty-six participants (aged 24 ± 4 years; BMI 23.1 ± 3.5 kg∙m^-2) were assessed. Significant differences in %BF estimates were found for all methodological pairings; p < 0.05. The SKF method underestimated %BF compared to HW (-2.52 ± 3.42 %BF). The Skulpt Chisel™ overestimated %BF compared to both HW (3.38 ± 6.10 %BF) and SKF (5.90 ± 5.26 %BF). Limits of agreement comparing HW to Skulpt Chisel™ indicated a difference between 95% confidence interval bounds (Upper bound: 5.84 %BF, Lower bound 0.92 %BF) and for HW to SKF (Upper bound: -1.14 %BF, Lower bound: -3.91 %BF). Regression analysis showed no significant bias for any methodological pairing; (p > 0.05). In conclusion, the Skulpt Chisel™ method should be used with caution when evaluating %BF of adults with similar demographics reported in this study.

Recommended Citation

Wells, Andrew D.; Bellovary, Bryanne N.; Houck, Jonathan M.; Ducharme, Jeremy B.; Masoud, Abdulaziz Abdulrahman A.; Gibson, Ann L.; and Mermier, Christine M. (2020) "New Multisite Bioelectrical Impedance Device Compared to Hydrostatic Weighing and Skinfold Body Fat Methods," International Journal of Exercise Science: Vol. 13 : Iss. 4, Pages 1718 - 1728.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.70252/DXJN8781
Available at: https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijes/vol13/iss4/37