En jämförande studie mellan traditionell hudvecksmätning (Harpenden) och ultraljudsmätning (BodyMetrix) för bestämning av kroppssammansättning

Sammanfattning: Background:Biomedical technology is a rapidly evolving field. The development of new technologies andmethods taking place at the same time as the range of products increases. It is not uncommonfor there to be multiple apparatuses for the same purpose, and the field of body composition isno exception. Weight fluctuation is natural and the reasons behind can be various. It could beunderlying diseases, living habits or level of physical activity. Understanding of causal factors isimportant, for instance to identify health risks and designing of diet plans or training schedules. Aim:The aim of this study is to compare two different apparatuses, Harpenden and BodyMetrix,against a third reference apparatus, BodPod. Which of these two relates best to the referenceapparatus? All apparatuses are used for estimation of body composition and different measuringmethods are used in every apparatus. The parameter of interest is fat percentage, and the resultwill be analyzed from two perspectives, women and men together and women and menseparately. Method:This study consists of three different stages, a literature study, an educational phase, and anempirical study. The literature study formed the basis for this study and provided useful andreliable information about the subject and technical aspects of utilised apparatuses. Theeducational phase was designed to give the authors an opportunity to learn how to manage theapparatuses before entering the empirical study. The empirical study was designed to providenecessary data for later comparison. 16 individuals participated in the empirical study andmeasurements with Harpenden and BodyMetrix where performed based on Jackson andPollock’s three-site method. Result and conclusion:This study found that Harpenden related better against the reference apparatus than BodyMetrixfor both women and men together and women and men separately. Deviation of varying levelswas observed but the error from Harpenden was more consistent while the error from BodyMetrixwas more scattered.