#3 site skinfold body fat calculator software#
#3 site skinfold body fat calculator free#

#3 site skinfold body fat calculator free#

Simplest methods to use in the field (clinical set-up or research at community level) is the 2 compartment (2C) model methods – fat and fat free mass (FFM). It is fundamental to the precise categorization of the body fat and BMI relationship which is the correct estimation of total body fat. However, the association between BMI and body fat percentage differs in Indians 5. All methods for BCA vary in their precision and accuracy 1.īody mass index (BMI) is easy tool to be used in the clinical set-ups, observational studies or epidemiological studies. Numerous techniques are available for BCA, ranging from simple indirect methods to complex direct volumetric measurements. Thus, in order to achieve various goals, health care professionals need precise measurements for BCA. When there is a difference between nutrient intake and requirement, body composition fluctuates. The growing popularity of physical activity for enhancing health and fitness has sharpened the health care professional’s perspective on techniques for evaluating the body composition 4. Body composition analysis (BCA) provides an insight to nutritional status, functional capacity of the human being, in formulating nutritional management and for observing of therapeutic nutrition intervention 1,2,3. Understanding of body composition is also crucial for health professionals. Available From: īody composition measurements are quantitative methods of nutritional assessment in humans. Comparison of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis and Skinfold Thickness to Determine Body Fat Percentage among Young Women. Evaluating anthropometric measurements is considered useful method as it controls regional changes of subcutaneous adiposity, whereas BIA technique can be used for its practical applicability.Īnthropometry Bioelectrical Impedance Body Composition Body Fat Percentage Skinfold Thickness However, the two methods are not interchangeable. Our study reported that BIA overestimates body fat percentages compared to SFT. BIA overestimates the body fat percentage with limits of agreement range -5.33% to 3.28%. It also showed difference of agreement between SFT & BIA methods. Although there was a positive correlation (p less than 0.01) observed between the two methods, Bland-Altman plot indicated a proportional bias (r=0.176, p less than0.05). Body fat percentage from skinfold thickness and BIA techniques were 32.79±5.048% and 33.85±5.32% respectively. Mean BMI of participants was 22.2±5.05 kg/m2. A total of 310 women (age 18-25 years) participated in this cross-sectional study.

#3 site skinfold body fat calculator software#

Statistical analysis including the Bland-Altman plot was performed in SPSS software v.23.0 and MS Excel. BIA was done using a body composition analyzer. Body fat percentage was computed using sum of skinfolds and Durnin-Womersley equation. The 4-site SFTs were measured at triceps, bicep, subscapular and suprailiac region, using Harpenden caliper. Objective of the study was to compare body fat percentage obtained using four-site skinfold thickness (SFT) measurement with bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) of young women. This study is focused on estimation of body fat percentage using two methods. There is an increased need for BCA methods, especially calculation of body fat percentage with better sensitivity and precision. Body composition analysis (BCA) measurements are the quantitative methods to evaluate nutritional status and adiposity.