Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T18:50:45.398Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measurement of short-term changes in the fat content of the body: a comparison of three methods in patients receiving intravenous nutrition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

D. J. Almond ,
R. F. G. J. King ,
L. Burkinshaw ,
C. B. Oxby  and
M. J. McMahon
D. J. Almond
Affiliation:
University Departments of Surgery and Medical Physics, The General Infirmary, Leeds LSI 3EX
R. F. G. J. King
Affiliation:
University Departments of Surgery and Medical Physics, The General Infirmary, Leeds LSI 3EX
L. Burkinshaw
Affiliation:
University Departments of Surgery and Medical Physics, The General Infirmary, Leeds LSI 3EX
C. B. Oxby
Affiliation:
University Departments of Surgery and Medical Physics, The General Infirmary, Leeds LSI 3EX
M. J. McMahon
Affiliation:
University Departments of Surgery and Medical Physics, The General Infirmary, Leeds LSI 3EX
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Three methods of measuring changes in body fat were compared in seventeen patients undergoing a 2-week course of intravenous nutrition. Patients received all nutrition intraveneously at a steady rate of infusion, calculated to supply energy at a rate equal to 1.5 times the resting metabolic expenditure measured before feeding. Fat change was estimated from measurements of skinfold thickness, by isotopic methods (neutron-activation analysis and dilution of tritiated water) and by daily analysis of expired gases.

2. The mean (with 1 SEM) gain in fat over the 2-week period was 1.14 (0.30) kg for skinfold measurement, 0.53 (0.62) kg for isotopic determination and 1.29 (0.22) kg for expired-gas analysis. There were no significant differences between the mean gains in fat measured by the three methods.

3. The results show that expired-gas analysis is the most sensitive technique, measuring change in fat content with an estimated precision of 0.26 kg. The isotopic method is less sensitive, with a precision of 2.38 kg, but provides a detailed description of body composition. In contrast to these highly-specialized techniques, both of which have limited application, the simple technique of measurement of skinfolds occupies an intermediate position of sensitivity, with a precision for measuring change in fat content of 0.85 kg, and also has the potential to measure total body fat content.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 52 , Issue 2 , September 1984 , pp. 215 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1984

References

REFERENCES

Behnke, A. R., Feen, B. G. & Welham, W. C. (1942). Journal of the American Medical Association 118, 495–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bistrian, B. R., Blackburn, G. L., Scrimshaw, N. S. & Flatt, J. P. (1975). American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 28, 1148–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, S. H., Ellis, K. J., Vartsky, D., Sawitsky, A., Gartenhaus, W., Yasumura, S. & Vaswani, A. N. (1981). American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 34, 2839–2847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Consolazio, F. W., Johnson, R. E. & Pecora, L. J. (1963). Physiological Measurements of Metabolic Functions in Man. New York; McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Daly, J. M., Vars, H. M. & Dudrick, S. J. (1972). Surgery, Gynaecology and Obstetrics 134, 15–21.Google Scholar
Durnin, J. V. G. A. & Womersley, J. (1974). British Journal of Nutrition 32, 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrow, J. S., Stalley, S., Diethelm, R., Pittet, Ph., Hesp, R. & Halliday, D. (1979). British Journal of Nutrition 42, 173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, G. L., Bradley, J. A., Smith, R. C., Smith, A. H., McCarthy, I. D., Oxby, C. B., Burkinshaw, L. & Morgan, D. B. (1979 a). Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 3, 215–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, G. L., King, R. F. G. J., Smith, R. C., Smith, A. H., Oxby, C. B., Sharafi, A. & Burkinshaw, L. (1979 b). British Journal of Surgery 66, 868–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, G. L., McCarthy, I. D., Collins, J. P. & Smith, A. H. (1978). British Journal of Surgery 65, 732–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irwin, T. T. & Hunt, T. K. (1974). Annals of Surgery 180, 765–772.Google Scholar
Kappagoda, C. T., Stoker, J. B. & Linden, R. J. (1974). Journal of Applied Physiology 37, 604–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macfie, J., Smith, R. C. & Hill, G. L. (1981). Gastroenterology 80, 103–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oxby, C. B., Appleby, D. B., Brooks, K., Burkinshaw, L., Krupowicz, D. W., McCarthy, I. D., Oldroyd, B., Ellis, R. E., Collins, J. P. & Hill, G. L. (1978). International Journal of Applied Radiation and Isotopes 29, 205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siri, W. E. (1956). Body Composition from Fluid Spaces and Density: Analysis of Methods. University of California Radiation Laboratory Report UCRL no. 3349.Google Scholar
Wolfe, R. R., O'Donnell, T. F., Stone, M. D., Richmand, D. A. & Burke, J. F. (1980). Metabolism 29, 892–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Womersley, J. & Durnin, J. V. G. A. (1973). Human Biology 45, 281–292.Google Scholar
Zuntz, N. & Schumberg, N. A. E. F. (1901). Studien zu einer Physiologie des Marsches. Berlin: A. Hirshwald.Google Scholar