Why is body composition important. Waist Measurement is an additional, independent risk factor and can be used in conjunction with any other method. VALIDATION & PRECISION. Validation of the BCM Body Composition Calculations examines the different calculations that can be done with total weight and body fat percentage such as determining goal weight. Questions or need more information? Ready for pricing or more information? Contact Futrex Tech, Inc. A DXA and Body Composition: Emerging Clinical Applications ARCHIVEDXA and Body Composition. Emerging Clinical Applications. Recording of a live webinar presented on February 1. Format: Archived Webinar. Credit: 1. 0 AMA PRA Category 1. Credit: 1. 0 ARRT Category AFee for Credit Certificate: $0. A certified one- hour educational activity for radiologists, radiologic technologists, geriatricians, bariatricians, primary care physicians, and healthcare professionals who work with obese and elderly patients. To enroll in this activity, click the ENROLL NOW icon to the left. DXA and Body Composition. Emerging Clinical Applications. Course Overview. Dual- emission x- ray absorptiometry (DXA) was primarily developed for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and is widely utilized in clinical practice. In research applications, DXA is the recognized gold standard for assessing body composition as it is highly precise, accessible, and requires a short scanning time. However, DXA is underutilized in clinical practice for body composition analysis because many clinicians are unaware of this emerging clinical application. Physician supervision is necessary to detect and treat weight- related medical conditions. Census Bureau, by 2. Sarcopenia is the age- related involuntary loss of skeletal muscle mass and functionality that can lead to the development of disability, frailty, and increased health care costs. Data support a research approach on preventive and treatment strategies for osteoporosis and sarcopenia targeting both bone and muscle tissues. However, many of the routine methods currently in clinical use are not precise enough to differentiate the percentage of fat, lean muscle, and bone necessary for treating and managing certain diseases and patient cohorts, eg, bariatric patients, some pediatric and geriatric patients, and those patients with wasting diseases, eating disorders, and digestive disorders. Whole Body Dual X- Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) to Determine Body Composition. Available at: https: //www. Accessed December 2, 2. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 1. Annual Meeting. Accessed October 2. Accessed November 1. New obesity scale proposed. Available at: http: //www. Accessed November 1. Jan- Feb; 5. 2(1): 7. Accessed November 1. Educational Objectives. At the conclusion of this activity, participants should be better able to: Assess the role of dual- energy x- ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the evaluation of body composition. Describe the pitfalls and challenges in using DXA for identifying at- risk patients. Buy Withings Body Cardio - Heart Health and Body Composition Wi-Fi Scale, Black on Amazon.com FREE SHIPPING on qualified orders. Weight loss is helpful for lowering your disease risk, but if you go about it the wrong way, you may end up with a higher body fat percentage than when you. 3 Section I - Navy Body Composition Assessment (BCA) Standard 1. BCA Requirements Per DODI 1308.3, there are only two approved methods to determine a member Gonadal Steroids and Body Composition, Strength, and Sexual Function in Men. Finkelstein, M.D., Hang Lee, Ph.D., Sherri-Ann M. Compare DXA to other methods of body composition analysis used in the clinical setting. Identify the patient populations that would best benefit from body composition analysis. Accreditation & Credit. This enduring material has been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of Postgraduate Institute for Medicine (PIM) and the International Center for Postgraduate Medical Education (ICPME). PIM is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians. Credit Designation. Physicians. The Postgraduate Institute for Medicine designates this enduring material for a maximum of 1. AMA PRA Category 1 Credits. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. SA- CME: This activity meets the criteria for self- assessment toward the purpose of fulfilling requirements in the American Board of Radiology (ABR) Maintenance of Certification Program. The European Accreditation Council for CME (EACCME. For more information go to http: //www. Radiologic Technologists. This program has been approved by the American Society of Radiologic Technologists (ASRT) for 1. ARRT Category A continuing education credit. How to Participate. There are no fees to participate in this activity. Each participant will need a computer with internet access. To register, click ENROLL NOW, then CONTINUE, CONFIRM ORDER, and ACCESS COURSE NOW. Click the blue link. Complete the precourse evaluation and click SUBMIT. Once the precourse evaluation is submitted, click on the blue link again to view the course. Click on PLAYBACK. To view the streaming video, you may have to download the Web. Ex Player or Java. How to Recieve Credit. View the entire one- hour session. The question- and- answer period at the end of the lecture is not required to receive credit. At the conclusion of the lecture, close the Web. Ex Player window. You will be redirected to the ICPME website. From the COURSE HOME page, click the buttons for POSTTEST and for EVALUATION. A passing grade of at least 7. Petak, MD, MACE, JD, FCLMDirector of the Osteoporosis Center and Bone Densitometry Unit. Clinical Assistant Professor. University of Texas Medical School at Houston. Dr. Petak graduated from the University of Illinois Abraham Lincoln School of Medicine in 1. He completed his internship and residency training in Internal Medicine at the University of Texas Medical School at Houston, serving as Chief Medical Resident and Instructor in Medicine. In 1. 98. 4 he was a Fellow in Endocrinology and the recipient of a five- year physician- scientist award by the National Institutes of Health. In 1. 98. 5 he became Assistant Professor in the Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Department of Pharmacology at the University of Texas Medical School at Houston. He obtained his law degree at the University of Houston Law Center in 1. He is master of the American College of Endocrinology (MACE) and fellow of the American College of Legal Medicine (FCLM). Dr. Petak is a past president of the American College of Endocrinology (2. Petak is also past President of the International Society of Clinical Densitometry and past President of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists. He chaired the Hypogonadism Task Force for the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, authored the guidelines on the Diagnosis and Management of the Hypogonadal Adult Male, and was a member of the guidelines writing group for post- menopausal osteoporosis. Petak has also served as Chairman of the Osteoporosis Advisory Committee of the Texas Department of Health. He is a bone densitometry and endocrinology consultant to NASA- JSC. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest. The Postgraduate Institute for Medicine (PIM) assesses conflict of interest with its instructors, planners, managers, and other individuals who are in a position to control the content of CME activities. All relevant conflicts of interest that are identified are thoroughly vetted by PIM for fair balance, scientific objectivity of studies utilized in this activity, and patient care recommendations. PIM is committed to providing its learners with high quality CME activities and related materials that promote improvements or quality in healthcare and not a specific proprietary business interest of a commercial interest. The faculty has reported NO financial relationship or relationships to products or devices they or their spouse/life partner have with commercial interests related to the content of this CME activity: Steven M. Petak, MD, MACE, JD, FCLMThe following planners and managers have reported NO financial relationships or relationships to products or devices they or their spouse/life partner have with commercial interests related to the content of this CME activity: Trace Hutchison, Pharm. D Samantha Mattiucci, Pharm. DLinda Mc. Lean, MS Victoria Phoenix, BSLisa Schleelein, MEd. Patricia Staples, MSN, NP- C, CCRNDisclosure of Unlabeled Use. This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the FDA. PIM, ICPME and Hologic, Inc., do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications. The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of PIM, ICPME and Hologic, Inc. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and warnings. Disclaimer. Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed or suggested in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation of their patient’s conditions and possible contraindications on dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer’s product information, and comparison with recommendations of other authorities. Questions. For questions regarding this program, please contact ICPME: Email: information@icpmed. Phone: 6. 07- 2. 57- 5. Jointly Provided by This activity is supported by an independent grant from. Body composition: What are athletes made of? Body composition can be defined as the proportion of fat and fat free mass (FFM) in the body. Fat free mass includes primarily muscle, bone, and water along with some other elements. Fat mass includes fat that is stored as an energy source and fat in the central nervous system, organs, bone marrow and sex tissues, known as essential fat. Body composition is typically expressed as percent body fat and pounds of FFM. For example, a student- athlete who weighs 1. FFM. This means that this athlete has approximately 2. If, after training and nutrition intervention, this athlete gains 3pounds., to 1. FFM of 1. 60 pounds, the athlete has demonstrated an improved body composition. This athlete lost 3 pounds of fat and gained 7 pounds of lean tissue, presumably muscle. Does body composition impact athletic performance and health? Body composition and weight should be viewed as the outcome of a well- executed fueling and training plan. Results are best utilized to track student- athlete lifestyle habits over time, and to prioritize individual nutrition strategies. Many elite athletes can easily fit into recommended ranges for their sport, but lifestyle habits are not optimized. Others may fall into the extremes, either over or under the typical ranges for their sport. Regardless, developing optimal fueling, training, rest and recovery habits should be priorities for all student- athletes, in order to optimize performance and long- term health. Many student- athletes have goals of gaining or losing weight. Some perceive direct performance benefits, some have aesthetic reasons while others are meeting the necessary weight requirements of their sport (e. Losing body fat while maintaining or increasing FFM is typically favorable in sports. When the focus is limited to scale weight, improper fueling becomes more likely as does the risk of losing lean tissue, bone mass or energy stores and gaining undesirable fat stores. Improper fueling can relate to increased illness and injury risk, poor recovery, decreased performance and more. Body composition targets. It is common for student- athletes to seek out a body composition goal or to ask . This should always be accompanied by education and counseling that different body types exist and succeed in different sports and that it is impossible to make a one- size- fits- all recommendation. Determining an individual target range may incorporate questions such as what was the student- athlete? What would reflect a realistic rate of change? What would allow the athlete to make important lifestyle changes that are realistic for her/him? Student- athletes may be familiar with the recommended healthy body fat range for adult males (1. As noted, different healthy ranges suit different individuals and lower (or even higher) could be appropriate for student- athletes, but these numbers may serve as valuable reference points. It is important to keep in mind that these values are based on skinfold caliper analysis; they are not applicable to other testing methods (DEXA, Bod Pod, etc.) which yield different results. Student- athletes should avoid extremely low body fat, which can be associated with impaired physiological function in both males and females. It is commonly suggested that 5 percent body fat for men and 1. A student- athlete with a higher body fat who drops a significant amount in a short time is at the same risk. Table 1 shows body composition ranges typical for collegiate student- athletes, based on skinfold caliper analysis. These values should not be taken as recommendations or strict guidelines. Rather, they should be used as a reference point when evaluating body composition results. Every student- athlete is different and the recommended range for any specific individual may or may not fall within the range. Table 2 shows compiled bod pod results from the 2. NFL combine. Note the variability of body composition by position played and also within each category. For example, running backs averaged 1. Table 1. Common body fat percentages of college student- athletes. Sport. Male. Female. Baseball. 12- 1. 5%1. Basketball. 6- 1. Football (Backs)9- 1. No data. Football (Linemen)1. No data. Gymnastics. High/long Jumpers. Ice/field Hockey. Distance running. Rowing. 6- 1. 4%1. Shot Putters. 16- 2. Sprinters. 8- 1. 0%1. Soccer. 10- 1. 8%1. Swimming. 9- 1. 2%1. Tennis. 12- 1. 6%1. Volleyball. 11- 1. Wrestlers. 5- 1. 6%No data. Table 2. 2. 00. 6 - 2. NFL Combine testing (Bod. Pod)Position# of Players% Fat Average% Fat Range. Body Weight Average (lb)Body Weigh Range (lb)DB4. Working with a registered dietitian, particularly a board certified specialist in sports dietetics (CSSD) to design a nutrition plan is recommended. There is no gold standard since some degree of estimation and error is associated with all methods. Regardless of measurement tool chosen, if any, it is important that student- athletes be educated on the concept of body composition. Understanding that body weight does not tell the whole story, that you can. Skinfold calipers are common, accessible, inexpensive, and thus, commonly used. The consistency and accuracy of results is highly dependent upon the individual conducting the assessment. Other athletics programs take tester variability out of the equation by using dual- energy X- ray absorptiometry (DEXA/i. DXA) and Bod Pod to assess body composition. Each of these methods has strengths and considerations for student- athletes and testers. See Table 3for more information about various testing methods. Considerations about body composition analysis: A body composition measurement from one method cannot be compared to one from another. For example, a football player evaluated by DEXA at his university cannot compare results to the Bod. Pod values he receives at the NFL combine. Likewise, when tester or equipment variation comes into play, results also cannot be compared. A cross country runner who has skinfold caliper measurements performed by her strength and conditioning coach cannot compare results to the same measurements taken by the sports dietitian. Measuring via the same method in a systematic way offers the most benefit for individuals and team analysis. Measurements should be done in private. Results should be handled with sensitivity. The National Athletic Trainers Association suggests that body composition results be treated the same as other medical information with regard to confidentiality. Measurements should be taken when student- athletes are well- hydrated and before exercise. In general, measurements should be taken no more frequently than every two to three months. Some professionals recommend twice per year or less. Defer to your sports dietitian regarding specific student- athlete protocols. The management of body composition data should be informed by your staff. There should always be a purpose for taking measurement. Clear and consistent communication is paramount. Testers must be sensitive to the impact of assessment on student- athletes. If resources are not available to assist with the management of body composition information and education, its best to avoid it altogether. Work with a sports RD to establish a body composition protocol that suits your student- athletes and staff. Table 3. Various methods of measuring body composition. Testing Mode% error. How it Works. Considerations. Skinfold Calipers+3%Hand- held calipers used to measure subcutaneous fat in specified. Inexpensive. Reliability and accuracy highly dependent on experience and skill of tester. Quick. Many published norms, data, and recommendations using this method which aids in comparisons. May feel intrusive to some athletes. Bod Pod(Air displacement plethysmography)+2- 3. Determines body volume through air displacement analysis. Body composition then estimated using equations. Expensive. Test is fairly quick (about 1. Athletes have to wear swimsuit or minimal tight clothing and cap . Lean tissue is more dense than water, and fat tissue is less dense than water (muscle sinks, fat floats). Athlete with higher body fat will weigh less underwater and athlete with more lean tissue will weigh more. Infrequently used; Very time- consuming. Accuracy poor in many athletic populations. Bioelectric impedance +3. Relies on concept that lean and fat tissues have different conductive properties as a small current is passed through the body. Relatively Inexpensive. Quick and easy to perform; tester requires little/no training. Results impacted by hydration status; hydration variability inevitable in athletes. Accuracy poor; not recommended for measuring changes in athletes. More likely in research setting. High accuracy and precision. Tester must be specially trained. Much less expensive than MRI and CTMeasures only subcutaneous fat; procedures for visceral and intramuscular fat being refined. More research underway to better assess value and application in sports. MRI/CT? Uses imaging technology to estimate fat/lean mass from tissue area. Expensive. Exposure to radiation. Lack of normative and comparison data. More research underway to better assess value and application in sports. Summarized from reference 2, Ackland et al. Turocy PS, De. Palma B, Horswill C, Laquale K, Martin T, Perry A, Somova M, Utter A. Moon J, Tobkin S, Smith A, Lockwood C, Walter A, Cramer J, Beck T, Stout J. Written by SCAN/CPSDA Registered Dietitians (RDs). For advice on customizing an eating plan that includes a caffeine dosing protocol that is safe and based on current evidence, consult an RD who specializes in sports, particularly a Board Certified Specialist in Sports Dietetics (CSSD). Find a SCAN RD at www. About Michelle Rockwell. Michelle Rockwell is a Registered Dietitian and Certified Specialist in Sports Dietetics with a private practice based in Blacksburg, Virginia. Michelle is the dietetics and graduate program coordinator at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
April 2017
Categories |