Anthropometric indicators associated with childhood obesity. Is it time for a BMI successor?

• Main Author: Teresa Walczyk (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: Kazimierz Wielki University, 2021-08-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 2391-8306; 10.12775/JEHS.2021.11.08.014
• Keywords: children; body mass index (bmi); relative fat mass pediatric (rfmp); tri-ponderal mass index (tmi); pediatric body adiposity index (baip); mid-upper arm circumference (muac); Education; L; Sports; GV557-1198.995; Medicine; R
• Source: Journal of Education, Health and Sport, Vol 11, Iss 8, Pp 134-147 (2021)

<p>Childhood obesity and overweight have a wide impact on physical and mental health, and affect adulthood. In the last decade, scientists have been looking with concern at the increasingly frequent excess body weight in children and adolescents. Therefore, it is crucial to estimate the scale of the problem, and thus to correctly assess the level of adipose tissue. In assessing the nutritional status of the young, anthropometric measurements and indicators are used. Despite the widespread use of BMI (body mass index), this indicator is often criticized. BMI is frequently recognized as an imprecise tool and its use often results in misleading classification. Therefore, the aim of this study is to present selected, non-invasive anthropometric indicators related to overweight/obesity in children.</p><p>Anthropometric indicators are relatively simple tools used in public health. However, the search for a simple and useful indicator is still ongoing, which will enable the assessment of the nutritional status both in clinical practice and in population studies. The paper presents the most frequently described anthropometric indicators in the literature: body mass index (BMI) and BMI_{z score}, relative fat mass pediatric (RFMp), tri-ponderal mass index (TMI), pediatric body adiposity fat index (BAIp) and the mid-upper arm circumference (MUCA). The possibilities of application and their effectiveness for the estimation of adipose tissue content and the risk of coexisting diseases are presented.</p><p>Although there is no consensus on the best tool, it is known that BMI will remain the main parameter in assessing nutritional status. Nevertheless, the authors suggest the usefulness of tools such as RFMp, TMI and MUAC as a good complement to the imperfections ascribed to BMI.</p>