Comparison of ultrasound and skinfold measurements in assessment of subcutaneous and total fatness

Abstract Ultrasound (A‐scan mode) and skinfold methods were evaluated in the measurement of subcutaneous fat thickness and prediction of total fat weight (by whole body potassium counting). Based on intraobserver correlations on 39 men at 15 body sites, skinfold caliper measurements were more reproducible than ones obtained by ultrasound. Measurements made with the two techniques at the same site typically produced different mean estimates of fat thickness. However, scores were often highly correlated with each other, indicating similar relative rankings of subjects by each technique. Skinfolds were more highly correlated with total fat weight than were ultrasound measurements, but body weight and anthropometric measures had even higher correlations with total fat weight. Anthropometric measurements were highly correlated with fatness because of their association with body weight, and when this relationship was statistically controlled for, they typically lost their predictive effectiveness. Multiple regression analyses revealed that the best predictors of fat weight were body weight along with skinfold and ultrasound measurements. These results suggest that skinfolds are a more effective means of assessing subcutaneous fat than ultrasound, especially when the large difference in cost of equipment is considered.