Cargando…

Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat

BACKGROUND: Accurate obesity classification is important so that appropriate intervention can be instituted to modify metabolic risk factors. Commonly utilized body mass index (BMI) and percentage body fat (PBF) are influenced by lean mass whereas fat mass index (FMI) measures only body fat. This st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wong, Joseph C., O’Neill, Sheila, Beck, Belinda R., Forwood, Mark R., Khoo, Soo Keat
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7808627/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33444369
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245436
_version_ 1783636939982766080
author Wong, Joseph C.
O’Neill, Sheila
Beck, Belinda R.
Forwood, Mark R.
Khoo, Soo Keat
author_facet Wong, Joseph C.
O’Neill, Sheila
Beck, Belinda R.
Forwood, Mark R.
Khoo, Soo Keat
author_sort Wong, Joseph C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Accurate obesity classification is important so that appropriate intervention can be instituted to modify metabolic risk factors. Commonly utilized body mass index (BMI) and percentage body fat (PBF) are influenced by lean mass whereas fat mass index (FMI) measures only body fat. This study compares the prevalence of obesity and metabolic risk factors with FMI, BMI and PBF using DXA (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry). METHODS: 489 women randomly recruited from the electoral roll were stratified into 4 age groups; 40–49, 50–59, 60–69 and 70–79 years from 2000 to 2001. Clinical data and DXA body composition were obtained. Statistical analyses were performed using Medcalc v15 (Ostend, Belgium) with significance level at p = 0.05 (two-tailed). RESULTS: There was higher prevalence of obesity using PBF compared to BMI and FMI (p<0.001). This difference was greater from age 50–59 (p<0.05) which may be explained by age-related lean mass loss. PBF over-classified obesity in over 35% of normal and 95% of overweight categories compared to FMI and BMI. BMI has a sensitivity of 78.9% and specificity of 98.3% for obesity using FMI as the standard. BMI under-classified obesity in the overweight category by 14.9% compared to FMI. There was no difference in diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension and metabolic syndrome prevalence within the BMI-obesity and FMI-obesity categories (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: PBF classified more obesity than BMI and FMI because of its low pre-determined threshold. The greater difference with PBF compared to BMI and FMI from the 50–59 decade onwards can be attributed to age-related lean mass loss. BMI had the lowest sensitivity for obesity diagnosis. BMI under-classified obesity in the overweight category compared to FMI due to its inability to differentiate lean mass. However, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of metabolic risk factors between BMI and FMI-obesity categories indicating that fat location may influence metabolic dysregulation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7808627
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78086272021-02-02 Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat Wong, Joseph C. O’Neill, Sheila Beck, Belinda R. Forwood, Mark R. Khoo, Soo Keat PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Accurate obesity classification is important so that appropriate intervention can be instituted to modify metabolic risk factors. Commonly utilized body mass index (BMI) and percentage body fat (PBF) are influenced by lean mass whereas fat mass index (FMI) measures only body fat. This study compares the prevalence of obesity and metabolic risk factors with FMI, BMI and PBF using DXA (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry). METHODS: 489 women randomly recruited from the electoral roll were stratified into 4 age groups; 40–49, 50–59, 60–69 and 70–79 years from 2000 to 2001. Clinical data and DXA body composition were obtained. Statistical analyses were performed using Medcalc v15 (Ostend, Belgium) with significance level at p = 0.05 (two-tailed). RESULTS: There was higher prevalence of obesity using PBF compared to BMI and FMI (p<0.001). This difference was greater from age 50–59 (p<0.05) which may be explained by age-related lean mass loss. PBF over-classified obesity in over 35% of normal and 95% of overweight categories compared to FMI and BMI. BMI has a sensitivity of 78.9% and specificity of 98.3% for obesity using FMI as the standard. BMI under-classified obesity in the overweight category by 14.9% compared to FMI. There was no difference in diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension and metabolic syndrome prevalence within the BMI-obesity and FMI-obesity categories (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: PBF classified more obesity than BMI and FMI because of its low pre-determined threshold. The greater difference with PBF compared to BMI and FMI from the 50–59 decade onwards can be attributed to age-related lean mass loss. BMI had the lowest sensitivity for obesity diagnosis. BMI under-classified obesity in the overweight category compared to FMI due to its inability to differentiate lean mass. However, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of metabolic risk factors between BMI and FMI-obesity categories indicating that fat location may influence metabolic dysregulation. Public Library of Science 2021-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7808627/ /pubmed/33444369 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245436 Text en © 2021 Wong et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wong, Joseph C.
O’Neill, Sheila
Beck, Belinda R.
Forwood, Mark R.
Khoo, Soo Keat
Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat
title Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat
title_full Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat
title_fullStr Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat
title_short Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat
title_sort comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7808627/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33444369
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245436
work_keys_str_mv AT wongjosephc comparisonofobesityandmetabolicsyndromeprevalenceusingfatmassindexbodymassindexandpercentagebodyfat
AT oneillsheila comparisonofobesityandmetabolicsyndromeprevalenceusingfatmassindexbodymassindexandpercentagebodyfat
AT beckbelindar comparisonofobesityandmetabolicsyndromeprevalenceusingfatmassindexbodymassindexandpercentagebodyfat
AT forwoodmarkr comparisonofobesityandmetabolicsyndromeprevalenceusingfatmassindexbodymassindexandpercentagebodyfat
AT khoosookeat comparisonofobesityandmetabolicsyndromeprevalenceusingfatmassindexbodymassindexandpercentagebodyfat