VARIATION IN THE ANTHROPOMETRIC DIMENSIONS FOR ESTIMATING UPPER AND LOWER-BODY OBESITY

A literature review identified 29 anthropometric methods to estimate b ody fat distribution, but no valid standardized set of criterion value s to categorize upper and lower body obesity. The purpose of this inve stigation was to observe the influence of different anthropometric met hods for categorizing upper and lower body obesity. Three common girth methods (waist:iliac crest, iliac crest:hip, and waist:hip) for waist to hip ratios (WHR) and one commmon skinfold method for trunk to extr emity ratio were compared in 119 obese women (38.4 +/- 5.3% fat) and 8 1 obese men (31.3 +/- 5.2% fat). Significant differences were found in the WHR among all three girth methods for women, but for only the wai st:hip method for men. A significant interaction between method and se x was also apparent. The different WHR methods resulted in a significa ntly different percentages of the population categorized as having low er, normal, and upper body obesity. Kappa statistics demonstrated sign ificant agreement among the three methods to place subjects into simil ar fat distribution categories for men (k = 0.133; z = 4.03), but not for women (k = 0.059; z = 2.20). There was also no significant correla tion between any of the circumference and skinfold methods for men(r = 0.20, 0.10 and 0.15, respectively); yet, significant correlations wer e found between the iliac crest:hip (r = 0.30) and waist:hip (r = 0.45 ) methods and the skinfold method for women. In summary, girth methods for estimating body fat distribution in terms of lower and upper body obesity need validation and standardization. (C) 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc .