Publication:

臺灣地區年輕女子中長跑選手之體組成測量方法評估

緒論：運用體組成(Body composition)分析來評估專項運動員的訓練成效，能提供一個重要且有效的資訊，體組成的最佳化會因不同專項運動而有所變化；如何準確的測量運動員的體組成，對於運動能力的評估是一項重要的課題，因此本研究目的在評估何種體組成的測量方法對年輕女子中長跑選手是精準的方式。方法：24名女子中長跑選手(年齡20.0 ± 1.4歲；身高 163.2 ± 6.5公分；體重 51.6 ± 4.4公斤)分別以八極板生物阻抗分析儀 (Octa-polar standing bioelectrical impedanceanalyzer,BIA8)、四極板生物阻抗分析儀(Tetra-polar bioelectrical impedanceanalyzer,BIA4)、空氣容積計量儀 (Air displacement plethysmography,ADP)與雙能X光吸收儀 (Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry,DXA) 進行體組成測量，並應用DXA的測量結果作為參考效標，檢測臺灣年輕女子中長跑選手的體組成。結果：BIA8、BIA4與ADP測量所得的去脂肪質量 (Fat free mass,FFM) 分別為41.5 ± 3.4公斤、40.3 ±3.4公斤、41.2 ± 7.5公斤，與DXA測量所得的去脂肪質量42.2 ± 3.5公斤，其對應的相關係數分別為0.84、0.88、0.71，應用Paired t-test比較結果並無達到顯著差異(p＞.05)。而應用BIA8、BIA4與ADP測量所得的體脂肪率(Body fat percentage,BF%)分別為19.5 ± 3.3%、21.9 ± 2.2%、17.9 ± 4.7%與DXA測量所得的體脂肪率18.5 ± 4.3%，其對應的相關係數分別為0.64、0.63、0.44，應用Paired t-test比較結果其中與BIA4估測結果達到顯著差異 (p＜.001)，BIA8與ADP並無達到顯著差異(p＞.05)。結論︰BIA8、BIA4、ADP用於估測臺灣地區年輕女子中長跑選手之體組成在FFM的測量結果精準度與DXA相當；在BF%的測量結果精準度僅BIA8、ADP與DXA相當；因此應用 BIA4測量臺灣地區年輕女子中長跑選手之BF%的體組成須更小心判斷。

Introduction: Body composition analysis provides important information for evaluating the training effectiveness on athletes. Optimized body composition of athlete will vary depending on different sport items. Therefore, how to accurately measure the athlete's body composition as part of the exercise capacity assessment has become an important issue. The purpose of this study is to examine what kinds of body composition analysis are accurate methods in young female middle-and-long distance runners. Methods: 24 young female middle-and-long distance runners (20.0 ± 1.4 year; 163.2 ± 6.5 cm; 51.6 ± 4.4 kg) were recruited. To measure body composition on these young women, Octa-polar standing bioelectrical impedance analyzer (BIA8), Tetra-polar bioelectrical impedance analyzer (BIA4) and air displacement plethysmography (ADP) were respectively applied, and results were compared to the Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry gold standards. Results: The fat free mass (FFM) measured by BIA8, BIA4, ADP and DXA were 41.5 ± 3.4 kg, 40.3 ± 3.4 kg, 41.2 ± 7.5 kg, and 42.2 ± 3.5 kg, respectively. The correlation coefficients of BIA8, BIA4, and ADP to DXA were 0.84, 0.88 and 0.71. No significant differences could be identified using the paired t-tests (p ＞ .05). The body fat percentage (BF%) measured by BIA8, BIA4 and ADP were 19.5 ± 3.3%, 21.9 ± 2.2%, and 17.9 ± 4.7%, respectively. While DXA gave the value of 18.5 ± 4.3%, the correlation coefficients were 0.64 (BIA8), 0.63 (BIA4), and 0.44 (ADP). However, only the BIA4 measurements reached significant difference (p ＜ .001); BIA8 and ADP results, on the other hand, showed no significant differences. Conclusion: The accuracy of measurements on FFM using BIA8, BIA4 and ADP were equivalent to the DXA data. On the other hand, different from BIA8 and ADP, BIA4 measurements on BF% was less accurate according to DXA results. Therefore, the results of Taiwan young female middle-and-long distance runners' body composition in terms of BF% obtained by BIA4 should be assessed and applied more carefully.