Upper-Arm Anthropometry: An Alternative Indicator of Nutritional Health to Body Mass Index in Unilateral Lower-Extremity Amputees?

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorMiller, M.
dc.contributor.authorWong, W.
dc.contributor.authorWu, J.
dc.contributor.authorCavenett, S.
dc.contributor.authorDaniels, L.
dc.contributor.authorCrotty, M.
dc.date.issued2008
dc.description.abstract<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the utility of body mass index (BMI) and corrected-arm-muscle area (CAMA) as measures of nutritional health for lower-limb amputees attending prosthetics clinics.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-sectional study.<h4>Setting</h4>Prosthetics clinic in Australia.<h4>Participants</h4>Unilateral lower-extremity amputees (N=58; age range, 21-91y; 37 transtibial, 21 transfemoral) attending a regional prosthetics clinic between May and November 2003.<h4>Interventions</h4>Not applicable.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Weight (without prosthesis), corrected and uncorrected for the amputated limb was used with height estimated from knee height to calculate corrected BMI (cBMI) and uncorrected BMI (uBMI). CAMA was calculated using the mean of triplicate mid-upper-arm circumference (MUAC) and triceps skinfold thickness (TST) measurements. The Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) and Assessment of Quality of Life were administered according to recommended protocols. The Pearson correlation was used to determine the strength and significance of associations between variables, and bivariate regression analyses were performed to determine whether an association existed between the nutritional variables (BMI, CAMA, MNA) and quality of life (QOL).<h4>Results</h4>There were no statistically significant differences in the measures of nutritional health according to site (transtibial, transfemoral) of amputation. MUAC, TST, and CAMA all showed moderate to high positive correlations (r range, .541-.782) with both cBMI and uBMI. The strength of the relationship between the MNA and cBMI/uBMI was weaker (r=.383, r=.380, respectively) but remained positive and statistically significant (P=.003). QOL was not associated with cBMI or uBMI but was related to CAMA (beta=-.132; P=.030) and MNA (beta=-.561; P=.017).<h4>Conclusions</h4>For persons with unilateral lower-extremity amputation, measurement of upper-arm anthropometry may be a more useful indicator of nutritional health and its consequences than BMI.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityMichelle Miller, Wing Ki Wong, Jing Wu, Sally Cavenett, Lynne Daniels, Maria Crotty
dc.identifier.citationArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2008; 89(10):2031-2033
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.apmr.2008.03.025
dc.identifier.issn0003-9993
dc.identifier.issn1532-821X
dc.identifier.orcidWu, J. [0000-0002-1554-9798]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/66467
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherW B Saunders Co
dc.rightsCopyright © 2008 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2008.03.025
dc.subjectDisabled persons
dc.subjectNutritional status
dc.subjectObesity
dc.subjectQuality of life
dc.subjectRehabilitation.
dc.titleUpper-Arm Anthropometry: An Alternative Indicator of Nutritional Health to Body Mass Index in Unilateral Lower-Extremity Amputees?
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Collections

Medicine publications