Download PDF
Physikalische Medizin, Rehabilitationsmedizin, Kurortmedizin 2016; 26(05): 242-244
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-109270
Wissenschaft und Forschung
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Test-Retest Reliability of Beurer Glass Diagnostic Scale for Measuring Body Mass Index

Retest-Reliabilität von Beurer Glas-Diagnosewaagen zur Messung des Body-Mass-Index
A. Alghadir
1   Rehabilitation Research Chair, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
,
S. Anwer
1   Rehabilitation Research Chair, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2   Dr. D. Y. Patil College of Physiotherapy, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, India
,
E. Al-Eisa
1   Rehabilitation Research Chair, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 22 December 2015

accepted: 19 May 2016

Publication Date:
09 November 2016 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the test-retest reliability of beurer glass diagnostic scale for measuring body mass index (BMI).

Methods: A total of 80 healthy male subjects in the age group of 19–45 years were participated in this study. The age and height of each participant was added into the beurer glass diagnostic scale prior to the measurement of the BMI. Each participant was measured twice to establish test-retest reliability. To assess test-retest reliability, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and the Bland-Altman method was used. The level of significance was set at 5% (p<0.05).

Results: The ICC values were significant and showed excellent magnitude (0.98–0.99) and no significant differences were found between the means of 2 measurement (p>0.05). A strong positive correlation between BMI of glass scale and BMI calculation method (r=0.994) and BMI of glass scale and body weight (r=0.943) were noted.

Conclusions: The results suggest that the beurer glass diagnostic scale is a reliable instrument for assessing BMI.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel: Ziel dieser Studie war die Beurteilung der Retest-Reliabilität von Beurer Glas-Diagnosewaagen zur Messung des Body-Mass-Index (BMI).

Methoden: Insgesamt nahmen 80 männliche Probanden in der Altersgruppe von 19–45 Jahren an dieser Studie teil. Vor Messung des BMI wurden Alter und Körpergröße jedes Probanden in die Beurer Glas-Diagnosewaage eingegeben. Jeder Proband wurde 2-mal gemessen, um die Retest-Reliabilität festzustellen. Um die Retest-Reliabilität zu bewerten, wurden der Intraklassen-Korrelationskoeffizient (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient ICC) und die Bland-Altman-Methode angewendet. Das Signifikanzniveau wurde auf 5% (p<0,05) festgelegt.

Ergebnisse: Die ICC-Werte waren signifikant und zeigten ausgezeichnete Ergebnisse (0,98–0,99); es ergaben sich keine signifikanten Unterschiede zwischen den Mittelwerten zweier Messungen (p>0,05). Es wurde eine starke positive Korrelation zwischen dem BMI der Glas-Diagnosewaage und der BMI-Berechnungsmethode (r=0,994) sowie zwischen dem BMI der Glas-Diagnosewaage und dem Körpergewicht (r=0,943) festgestellt.

Schlusfolgerung: Die Ergebnisse lassen darauf schließen, dass die Beurer Glas-Diagnosewaage ein zuverlässiges Instrument ist, um den BMI zu berechnen.

Key words

body mass index - measurement - reliability

Schlüsselwörter

Body-Mass-Index - Messung - Reliabilität
 

  • References

  • 1 Gutierrez-Fisac JL, Banegas Banegas JR, Artalejo FR, Regidor E. Increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity among spanish adults, 1987–1997. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2000 24. 1677-1682
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Olds TS, Harten NR. One hundred years of growth: The evolution of height, mass, and body composition in Australian children, 1899–1999. Hum Biol 2001; 73: 727-738
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Caballero B. Introduction. Symposium: Obesity in developing countries: Biological and ecological factors J Nutr 2001; 131: 866S-870S
    PubMed
  • 4 Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults – The Evidence Report. National Institutes of Health. Obes Res. 1998; (Suppl. 02) 51S-209S Erratum in: Obes Res 1998; 6:464
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. Report of a WHO Expert Committee. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 1995; 854: 1-452
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Seidell JC, Kahn HS, Williamson DF, Lissner L, Valdez R. Report from a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Workshop on use of adult anthropometry for public health and primary health care. Am J Clin Nutr 2001; 73: 123-126
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 dos Santos DM, Sichieri R. Body mass index and measures of adiposity among elderly adults. Rev Saude Publica 2005; 39: 163-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Dumoulin C, Gravel D, Bourbonnais D et al. Reliability of dynamometric measurements of the pelvic floor musculature. Neurourol Urodyn 2004; 23: 134-142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. 2nd (ed.). Norwalk, CT: Appleton & Lange. 2000
    Google Scholar