Cargando…

Differences between Active and Semi-Active Students Regarding the Parameters of Body Composition Using Bioimpedance and Magnetic Bioresonance Technologies

The aim of the study was to identify differences in obesity-related parameters between active sports students and semi-active or sedentary students, differentiated by sex, in order to optimize health. The study sample included 286 students, of which the male experimental sample consisted of 86 activ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Badau, Dana, Badau, Adela, Trambitas, Cristian, Trambitas-Miron, Dia, Moraru, Raluca, Stan, Alexandru Antoniu, Oancea, Bogdan Marian, Turcu, Ioan, Grosu, Emilia Florina, Grosu, Vlad Teodor, Daina, Lucia Georgeta, Daina, Cristian Marius, Suteu, Corina Lacramioara, Moraru, Liviu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8345541/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34360200
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18157906
_version_ 1783734653547446272
author Badau, Dana
Badau, Adela
Trambitas, Cristian
Trambitas-Miron, Dia
Moraru, Raluca
Stan, Alexandru Antoniu
Oancea, Bogdan Marian
Turcu, Ioan
Grosu, Emilia Florina
Grosu, Vlad Teodor
Daina, Lucia Georgeta
Daina, Cristian Marius
Suteu, Corina Lacramioara
Moraru, Liviu
author_facet Badau, Dana
Badau, Adela
Trambitas, Cristian
Trambitas-Miron, Dia
Moraru, Raluca
Stan, Alexandru Antoniu
Oancea, Bogdan Marian
Turcu, Ioan
Grosu, Emilia Florina
Grosu, Vlad Teodor
Daina, Lucia Georgeta
Daina, Cristian Marius
Suteu, Corina Lacramioara
Moraru, Liviu
author_sort Badau, Dana
collection PubMed
description The aim of the study was to identify differences in obesity-related parameters between active sports students and semi-active or sedentary students, differentiated by sex, in order to optimize health. The study sample included 286 students, of which the male experimental sample consisted of 86 active sports students, age X ± SD 21.25 ± 0.32 years; height X ± SD 181.08 ± 3.52 cm; control group consisting of 89 semi-active students aged X ± SD 21.07 ± 0.1.13 years; height X ± SD 182.11 ± 1.32. The female experimental sample includes 57 active sports students, age X ± SD 21.02 ± 0.92 years; height X ± SD 167.48 ± 1.34 cm; the control group includes 54 semi-active students aged X ± SD 21.57 ± 0.1.98 years; height X ± SD 168.42 ± 1.76. The study used a thalliometer, Tanita Health Ware software and Quantum Resonance Magnetic Analyzer equipment to investigate height (cm), Body Mass Index (BMI), muscle mass (kg, %), as well as the obesity analysis report, and componential analysis of body and nourishment. The differences registered between the samples of active and semi-active sports subjects were predominantly statistically significant for p < 0.05. The differences registered between the samples of active and semi-active sports subjects were predominantly statistically significant for p < 0.05. The most important parameters regarding obesity and body composition that registered significant differences between the two male groups were in favor of the group of active athletes: triglyceride content of abnormal coefficient 0.844 (CI95% 0.590–1.099), abnormal lipid metabolism coefficient 0.798 (CI95% 1.091–0.504), obesity degree of body (ODB %) 10.290 (CI95% 6.610–13.970), BMI 2.326 (CI95% 1.527–3.126), body fat (kg) 2.042 (CI95% 0.918–3.166), muscle volume (kg) 2.565 (CI95% 1.100–4.031), Lean body weight (kg) 2.841 (CI95% 5.265–0.418). In the case of female samples, the group of active sportswomen registered the biggest differences compared to the group of students who were significantly active in the parameters: abnormal lipid metabolism coefficient 1.063 (CI95% 1.380–0.746), triglyceride content of abnormal coefficient 0.807 (CI95% 0.437–1.178), obesity degree of body (ODB%) 8.082 (CI95% 2.983–13.181), BMI 2.285 (CI95% 1.247–3.324), body fat (kg) 2.586 (CI95% 0.905–4.267), muscle volume (kg) 2.570 (CI95% 0.154–4.985), lean body weight (kg) 4.118 (CI95% 1.160–7.077). The results of the study directly facilitate the understanding of the complexity of the impact of obesity on multiple parameters of body composition and health.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8345541
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83455412021-08-07 Differences between Active and Semi-Active Students Regarding the Parameters of Body Composition Using Bioimpedance and Magnetic Bioresonance Technologies Badau, Dana Badau, Adela Trambitas, Cristian Trambitas-Miron, Dia Moraru, Raluca Stan, Alexandru Antoniu Oancea, Bogdan Marian Turcu, Ioan Grosu, Emilia Florina Grosu, Vlad Teodor Daina, Lucia Georgeta Daina, Cristian Marius Suteu, Corina Lacramioara Moraru, Liviu Int J Environ Res Public Health Article The aim of the study was to identify differences in obesity-related parameters between active sports students and semi-active or sedentary students, differentiated by sex, in order to optimize health. The study sample included 286 students, of which the male experimental sample consisted of 86 active sports students, age X ± SD 21.25 ± 0.32 years; height X ± SD 181.08 ± 3.52 cm; control group consisting of 89 semi-active students aged X ± SD 21.07 ± 0.1.13 years; height X ± SD 182.11 ± 1.32. The female experimental sample includes 57 active sports students, age X ± SD 21.02 ± 0.92 years; height X ± SD 167.48 ± 1.34 cm; the control group includes 54 semi-active students aged X ± SD 21.57 ± 0.1.98 years; height X ± SD 168.42 ± 1.76. The study used a thalliometer, Tanita Health Ware software and Quantum Resonance Magnetic Analyzer equipment to investigate height (cm), Body Mass Index (BMI), muscle mass (kg, %), as well as the obesity analysis report, and componential analysis of body and nourishment. The differences registered between the samples of active and semi-active sports subjects were predominantly statistically significant for p < 0.05. The differences registered between the samples of active and semi-active sports subjects were predominantly statistically significant for p < 0.05. The most important parameters regarding obesity and body composition that registered significant differences between the two male groups were in favor of the group of active athletes: triglyceride content of abnormal coefficient 0.844 (CI95% 0.590–1.099), abnormal lipid metabolism coefficient 0.798 (CI95% 1.091–0.504), obesity degree of body (ODB %) 10.290 (CI95% 6.610–13.970), BMI 2.326 (CI95% 1.527–3.126), body fat (kg) 2.042 (CI95% 0.918–3.166), muscle volume (kg) 2.565 (CI95% 1.100–4.031), Lean body weight (kg) 2.841 (CI95% 5.265–0.418). In the case of female samples, the group of active sportswomen registered the biggest differences compared to the group of students who were significantly active in the parameters: abnormal lipid metabolism coefficient 1.063 (CI95% 1.380–0.746), triglyceride content of abnormal coefficient 0.807 (CI95% 0.437–1.178), obesity degree of body (ODB%) 8.082 (CI95% 2.983–13.181), BMI 2.285 (CI95% 1.247–3.324), body fat (kg) 2.586 (CI95% 0.905–4.267), muscle volume (kg) 2.570 (CI95% 0.154–4.985), lean body weight (kg) 4.118 (CI95% 1.160–7.077). The results of the study directly facilitate the understanding of the complexity of the impact of obesity on multiple parameters of body composition and health. MDPI 2021-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8345541/ /pubmed/34360200 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18157906 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Badau, Dana
Badau, Adela
Trambitas, Cristian
Trambitas-Miron, Dia
Moraru, Raluca
Stan, Alexandru Antoniu
Oancea, Bogdan Marian
Turcu, Ioan
Grosu, Emilia Florina
Grosu, Vlad Teodor
Daina, Lucia Georgeta
Daina, Cristian Marius
Suteu, Corina Lacramioara
Moraru, Liviu
Differences between Active and Semi-Active Students Regarding the Parameters of Body Composition Using Bioimpedance and Magnetic Bioresonance Technologies
title Differences between Active and Semi-Active Students Regarding the Parameters of Body Composition Using Bioimpedance and Magnetic Bioresonance Technologies
title_full Differences between Active and Semi-Active Students Regarding the Parameters of Body Composition Using Bioimpedance and Magnetic Bioresonance Technologies
title_fullStr Differences between Active and Semi-Active Students Regarding the Parameters of Body Composition Using Bioimpedance and Magnetic Bioresonance Technologies
title_full_unstemmed Differences between Active and Semi-Active Students Regarding the Parameters of Body Composition Using Bioimpedance and Magnetic Bioresonance Technologies
title_short Differences between Active and Semi-Active Students Regarding the Parameters of Body Composition Using Bioimpedance and Magnetic Bioresonance Technologies
title_sort differences between active and semi-active students regarding the parameters of body composition using bioimpedance and magnetic bioresonance technologies
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8345541/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34360200
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18157906
work_keys_str_mv AT badaudana differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT badauadela differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT trambitascristian differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT trambitasmirondia differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT moraruraluca differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT stanalexandruantoniu differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT oanceabogdanmarian differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT turcuioan differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT grosuemiliaflorina differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT grosuvladteodor differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT dainaluciageorgeta differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT dainacristianmarius differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT suteucorinalacramioara differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies
AT moraruliviu differencesbetweenactiveandsemiactivestudentsregardingtheparametersofbodycompositionusingbioimpedanceandmagneticbioresonancetechnologies