A COMPARISON OF BODY COMPOSITION MEASUREMENTS WITH BEST PRACTICE PRE-TEST CONDITIONS AND CONTROLLED NON-BEST PRACTICE PRE-TEST CONDITIONS USING DUAL X-RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY, BIOIMPEDANCE SPECTROSCOPY, ULTRASOUND, SKINFOLDS, AND THE 4 COMPARTMENT MODEL IN RECREATIONALLY TRAINED MALES AND FEMALES

The purpose of this study was to compare body composition measurements with best practice pre-test conditions and controlled non-best practice pre-test conditions using bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), ultrasound (US), skinfolds (SF), dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and the four compartment (4C) model. Eighteen resistance-trained individuals participated. On day 0, participants logged all activities including food, fluid, and exercise. Participants arrived at the lab the next morning, day 1, following best-standardized practice protocols (fasted and non-exercised for 12 hours). Participants were measured with the 4 methods. Participants continued to log their activity and returned to the lab 4-7 hours later to repeat the same testing protocol in a non-best practice state. Continuing to log their activity, individuals did not report to the lab for testing on day 2 but were instructed to repeat their logged activities from day 0. Individuals reported back to the lab for re-testing on day 3, repeating the procedures/activities/food log from day 1. The reliability analyses indicated excellent stability of scores, with values ranging from 0.89 to 0.99. Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to determine if the BF% estimates were different between time points of day 1 and day 3. The results indicated there was a significant main effect for method (p = 0.003) where 4C, BIS, SF, and US all reported significantly lower values than DXA. In conclusion, body composition measurements were not significantly affected by following an unstandardized best practice protocol when compared to testing in a standardized best practice protocol