Comparação entre três protocolos por dobra cutânea para estimativa da gordura corporal relativa em homens e mulheres universitários

• Viana, Albert da Silva ^[1] ; de Oliveira Filho, Aluizio Picanço ^[1] ; de Brito, Alex Lima ^[1] ; Alberto, Álvaro Adolfo Duarte ^[1] ; Belfort, Dilson Rodrigues ^[1] ; Materko, Wollner ^[1]
  1. [1] Universidade Federal do Amapá

     Universidade Federal do Amapá

     Brasil

     
• Localización: RBONE - Revista Brasileira de Obesidade, Nutrição e Emagrecimento, ISSN-e 1981-9919, Vol. 12, Nº. 76, 2018 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Suplementar 2), págs. 1150-1156
• Idioma: portugués
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Comparison between the three methods of production of women and university women
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Dialnet Métricas: 2 Citas
• Resumen
  • English

    The purpose of the present study was to compare the results of the body fat percentage based on the skin fold equations of Pollock et al. (1978; 1980), Faulkner (1968) and Guedes (1985) combined with the Siri equation in university men and women. Twenty volunteers (8 women and 12 men) between 18 until 41 years old and physically active. All volunteers were submitted an anthropometric evaluation by same and experienced evaluator. The Anova test was used by repetitive measures and the Bonferroni post hoc. All tests assumed   = 0.05. The results was observed a significant difference (p = 0.04) when comparing the body fat percentage result between the Pollock and Guedes equations for men (12.4 ± 1.5%  (Pollock), 13.9 ± 1.4% (Guedes) and 13.4 ± 0.8% of fat (Faulkner), compared to women there was a difference of significance (p = 0.006) in all equations 23.0 ± 1.7% (Pollock), 19.8 ± 1.1% (Guedes) and 17.0 ± 1.3% fat (Faulkner). In conclusion, the presented results evidenced a significant difference between the different equations for body fat percentage estimation in university both sexes. 

  • português

    O objetivo do presente estudo foi comparar os resultados da gordura corporal relativa baseado nas equações por dobra cutânea de Pollock e colaboradores (1978; 1980), Faulkner (1968) e Guedes (1985) combinadas com a equação de Siri em homens e mulheres universitários. Participaram deste estudo 20 voluntários (8 mulheres e 12 homens) universitários entre 18 a 41 anos e praticante de atividade física. Todos os voluntários passaram por uma avaliação antropométrica por um único e experiente avaliador. Utilizou-se o teste de Anova para medidas repetidas, e o post hoc Bonferroni, quando encontrada diferença significativa. Observou diferença significativa (p = 0,04) ao comparar o resultado da gordura corporal relativa entre as equações de Pollock e Guedes para homens (12,4 ± 1,5 % de gordura (Pollock), 13,9 ± 1,4 % de gordura (Guedes) e 13,4 ± 0,8 % de gordura (Faulkner), em comparação a mulheres houve diferença de significância (p = 0,006) em todas as equações (23,0 ± 1,7 % de gordura; (Pollock), 19,8 ± 1,1 % de gordura (Guedes) e 17,0 ± 1,3 % de gordura (Faulkner). Em conclusão, os resultados apresentados evidenciam uma diferença significativa entre as diferentes equações para a estimativa da gordura corporal relativa em universitários ambos os sexos. ABSTRACT Comparison between the three methods of production of women and university womenThe purpose of the present study was to compare the results of the body fat percentage based on the skin fold equations of Pollock et al. (1978; 1980), Faulkner (1968) and Guedes (1985) combined with the Siri equation in university men and women. Twenty volunteers (8 women and 12 men) between 18 until 41 years old and physically active. All volunteers were submitted an anthropometric evaluation by same and experienced evaluator. The Anova test was used by repetitive measures and the Bonferroni post hoc. All tests assumed   = 0.05. The results was observed a significant difference (p = 0.04) when comparing the body fat percentage result between the Pollock and Guedes equations for men (12.4 ± 1.5%  (Pollock), 13.9 ± 1.4% (Guedes) and 13.4 ± 0.8% of fat (Faulkner), compared to women there was a difference of significance (p = 0.006) in all equations 23.0 ± 1.7% (Pollock), 19.8 ± 1.1% (Guedes) and 17.0 ± 1.3% fat (Faulkner). In conclusion, the presented results evidenced a significant difference between the different equations for body fat percentage estimation in university both sexes.