the sites: there are many common sites at which the skinfold pinch can be taken. See the descriptions and photographs of each skinfold site.

It is best to use the sum of several sites to monitor and compare body fat measures. In order to satisfy those who want to calculate a percentage body fat measure, there is a sample of equations for calculating this here. Below is a table of general guidelines based on personal experience for using total sum in millimeters of the seven main skinfold sites tricep , bicep , subscap , supraspinale , abdominal , thigh , calf.

There are also examples of some actual athlete results. target population: suitable for all populations, though it is sometimes difficult to get reliable measurements with obese people.

validity: using skinfold measurements is not a valid predictor of percent bodyfat, however they can be used as a monitoring device to indicate changes in body composition over time. It is important to maintain correct calibration of the calipers more about calibrating calipers.

reliability: the reliability of skinfold measurements can vary from tester to tester depending on their skill and experience. There are accreditation courses available through ISAK. advantages: Skinfold measurements are widely utilized to assess body composition. It is a lot simpler than hydrostatic weighing and many of the other body composition techniques.

After the original outlay for calipers, the daily tests costs are minimal. other considerations: some participants may feel uncomfortable stripping down in front of the tester, therefore every effect should be made to make them feel comfortable.

For legal reasons, it is wise to have another person present, and to have females testers for female participants. The right side measurement is standard, though in some situations you may need to test someone on the left side.

If so, you must record this and endeavor to always test on the same side for that person. Reasons for testing on the left side may include injuries, amputation, deformities, or other medical conditions. Skinfold thickness results rely on formulas that convert these numbers into an estimate of a person's percentage of body fat according to a person's age and gender.

The skinfold measurement test is one of the oldest and most common methods of determining a person's body composition and body fat percentage.

This test estimates the percentage of body fat by measuring skinfold thickness at specific locations on the body. Skinfold measurements are generally taken at specific sites on the right side of the body, with the tester pinching the skin at the location site and pulling the fold of skin away from the underlying muscle so only the skin and fat tissue are being held.

Special skinfold calipers are then used to measure the skinfold thickness in millimeters. Two measurements are recorded and averaged. The measurement sites vary depending upon the specific skinfold testing protocol being used, but typically include the following seven locations on the body.

These include the abdomen, midaxilla, pectoral area, quadriceps, subscapular area, suprailiac area, and triceps. Once you have taken skinfold measurements, you'll need to convert these numbers into a percent of body fat.

The easiest way to calculate the percent of body fat is to use a software program. There are as many different formulas and calculations as there are ways to measure skinfold thickness, but some that have held up over time include those published by Jackson and Pollock. You can find these being used in the following online body fat calculators:.

If you would like to measure your body fat percentage without requiring any special tools or measurements, you can also try out our calculator:.

The accuracy of these tests may depend on the type of calipers being used, the competence of the tester, and a person's level of hydration at the time of the test. Since using the calipers can be difficult, skinfold measurements may not be the best choice for assessing fat percentages, especially if you're trying to do it yourself.

With other technologies available, skinfold testing is becoming somewhat of an ancient art-form. Most personal trainers today use electrical impedance methods and scales that measure body composition instead of directly measuring skinfolds.

No matter the method you use, it's important to keep in mind that weight fluctuates constantly and most body composition tests should be used as a general reference point and are best when averaged over a given timeframe. Beam JR, Szymanski DJ. Validity of 2 skinfold calipers in estimating percent body fat of college-aged men and women.

J Strength Cond Res. Barreira TV, Staiano AE, Katzmarzyk PT. Validity assessment of a portable bioimpedance scale to estimate body fat percentage in white and African-American children and adolescents.

and Siervogel, R. Development and validation of skinfold-thickness prediction equations with a 4-compartment model. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition , 77 5 , pp.

Evans, E. and Arngrímsson, S. Skinfold prediction equation for athletes developed using a four-component model. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise , 37 11 , pp. López-Taylor, J.

and Torres-Naranjo, F. Accuracy of Anthropometric Equations for Estimating Body Fat in Professional Male Soccer Players Compared with DXA. Journal of Sports Medicine , Silva, A.

and Sardinha, L. Are skinfold-based models accurate and suitable for assessing changes in body composition in highly trained athletes?. Shakibaee, A.

and Asgari, A. How accurate are the anthropometry equations in in Iranian military men in predicting body composition?. Asian Journal of Sports Medicine, 6 4. and Falvey, E. Application of a sub-set of skinfold sites for ultrasound measurement of subcutaneous adiposity and percentage body fat estimation in athletes.

International Journal of Sports Medicine, 37 05 , pp. Application of a Sub-set of Skinfold Sites for Ultrasound Measurement of Subcutaneous Adiposity and Percentage Body Fat Estimation in Athletes. Müller, W. and Ahammer, H. Body composition in sport: a comparison of a novel ultrasound imaging technique to measure subcutaneous fat tissue compared with skinfold measurement.

British Journal of Sports Medicine, 47 16 , pp. and Schwartz, S. A-mode and B-mode ultrasound measurement of fat thickness: a cadaver validation study. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition , p.

Civar, S. and Ayceman, N. Validity of leg-to-leg bioelectrical impedance measurement in highly active males. Biology of Sport, 20 3 , pp. Wilmore, J.

and Behnke, A. An anthropometric estimation of body density and lean body weight in young men. Journal of Applied Physiology, 27 1 , pp.

Reilly, T. and Wallace, J. How well do skinfold equations predict percent body fat in elite soccer players?. International Journal of Sports Medicine , 30 08 , pp. Withers, R. and Norton, K. Relative body fat and anthropometric prediction of body density of male athletes. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology , 56 2 , pp.

Suarez-Arrones, L. and Méndez-Villanueva, A. Deurenberg, P. and Seidell, J. Body mass index as a measure of body fatness: age-and sex-specific prediction formulas. British Journal of Nutrition , 65 2 , pp. Faulkner, J. Physiology of swimming.

Research Quarterly. American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation , 37 1 , pp. Zemski, A. and Slater, G. Pre-season body composition adaptations in elite Caucasian and Polynesian rugby union athletes. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism , pp.

Longitudinal changes in body composition assessed using DXA and surface anthropometry show good agreement in elite rugby union athletes. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism , 20 XX , pp. Aandstad, A.

and Anderssen, S. Validity and reliability of bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold thickness in predicting body fat in military personnel. Military Medicine, 2 , pp. Nagy, E. and Moreno, L. Harmonization process and reliability assessment of anthropometric measurements in a multicenter study in adolescents.

International Journal of Obesity, 32 S5 , p. Lozano-Berges, G. and Vicente-Rodríguez, G. Assessing fat mass of adolescent swimmers using anthropometric equations: a DXA validation study. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 88 2 , pp. Fonseca-Junior, S. and Pierucci, A.

Validity of skinfold equations, against dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, in predicting body composition in adolescent pentathletes. Pediatric Exercise Science, 29 2 , pp.

Santos, D. and Silva, A.

This research group produced very accurate 7-site and 3-site prediction equations; gender and race are also considered [18]. more i. The total body of research suggests that there is merely a slight difference, if any at all, between the precision of 3-site and 7-site skinfold prediction equations.

Despite the advancements in skinfold testing, new research using ultrasound US imaging techniques shows that any caliper-based skinfold assessment method lacks validity relative to its US-based counterpart [].

This is primarily because skinfold-pinching measures a compressed double layer of subcutaneous adipose tissue and skin, whereas the US technique measures only the metric of interest, uncompressed subcutaneous adipose tissue, with high accuracy [24].

The use of ultrasound US as a body composition assessment tool is discussed in more detail, here. Using a beam of skin-penetrating ultrasonic waves i. high-frequency sound waves above the upper limit of human hearing emitted by a transducer probe, body fat percentage is estimated based on the acoustic impedance of different tissue borders.

Similar to skinfold assessment, ultrasound is used to assess regional subcutaneous fat tissue. However, ultrasound measures the subcutaneous fat tissue thickness in a decompressed state i. single layer , whereas skinfold assessment requires pinching of the skin and subsequent measurement of the same tissue in a compressed state i.

double layer. Using a prediction equation, US estimates the breakdown of 1 lean mass, and 2 fat mass, inside the body. López-Taylor recently investigated 31 different anthropometric equations against DXA in male soccer players of varying ethnicities [19].

Of these 31 equations, 14 and 17 were developed in athletic, and nonathletic populations, respectively. In general, the equations developed in athletes that had the highest agreements with DXA, with an equation by Civar et al. Ironically, an equation using a mere two skinfold sites abdomen and thigh developed in male nonathletes by Wilmore and Behnke [27] was more closely related with DXA, compared with the other equations developed in athletes.

The results of this study differ from those obtained from anthropometric comparisons in other male soccer players. In 45 professional male soccer players from the Premier League [28], a 7-site skinfold equation developed by Withers et al. Recently, Suarez-Arrones et al.

With the exception of one equation created by Deurenberg et al. in [31], and BIA via a Tanita device, body fat percentages derived from all skinfold equations had moderate or strong relationships with the body fat percentages derived via DXA [30].

However, the strength of the relationships differed among equations used, with an equation developed in by John Faulkner [32] having the strongest relationship with DXA [29]. The results from these studies demonstrate the lack of agreement between equations, and inconsistent outcomes when compared with more precise body composition assessment methods, such as DXA.

As demonstrated by Zemski et al. Substantial intra- and inter-observer variability exists [35, 36]. For example, varying the skinfold site by as little as 1 centimeter can produce significantly different results when experienced practitioners measure the same participant [7, 40].

The research regarding which skinfold equation s most accurately predict body fat percentage in athletes is inconsistent, at best. Factors including age, sport, race, gender, and others, appear to impact equation validity. However, skinfold assessment can also be quite reliable and should be considered as a convenient, practical indicator of intra-individual regional and total body composition change over time.

Although 3-site and 7-site skinfold equations are similar in accuracy, I lean towards collecting data on more sites. In the case that a novel, highly accurate equation is developed, the practitioner will be better suited to apply the novel, more accurate equation with his or her data set.

Here are a few major advantages and disadvantages of skinfolds testing:. Skip to content Resources to Optimize Athletic Performance and Sports Sciences. Grey boxes are summary points Blue boxes give more detail about key terms or subjects How Skinfold Assessment Works Anthropometry involves the measurement of body dimensions, which can include height, weight, length, width, circumference, and skinfold thickness [1].

Ackland et al. Current status of body composition assessment in sport. Sports Medicine , 42 3 , pp. Where it All Began Given skinfold assessment simplicity and lack of required technology, it has been used to predict body density and total body fat for a long time.

The New Age of Skinfold Equations and 3 vs. An Ultrasound Teaser Despite the advancements in skinfold testing, new research using ultrasound US imaging techniques shows that any caliper-based skinfold assessment method lacks validity relative to its US-based counterpart [].

Suarez-Arrones et al. Body fat assessment in elite soccer players: cross-validation of different field methods. Science and Medicine in Football , pp. Summary The research regarding which skinfold equation s most accurately predict body fat percentage in athletes is inconsistent, at best.

Here are a few major advantages and disadvantages of skinfolds testing: Advantages Disadvantages High reliability if the tester is experienced and consistent Low validity, and very low validity in larger subjects Low cost Tester expertise required Quick to execute High inter-tester variability i.

reliability can be poor when the tester does not remain the same Minimal equipment and subject participation required Most skinfold calipers have an upper limit of 45—60 mm, limiting their use to moderately overweight subjects No technology necessary Prediction equations may only be valid in the population in which they are derived Allows for regional body fatness assessment Some subjects may feel uncomfortable stripping down to bare skin in front of the tester References Fosbøl, M.

and Zerahn, B. Contemporary methods of body composition measurement. Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging , 35 2 , pp. Wagner, D. and Heyward, V. Techniques of body composition assessment: a review of laboratory and field methods.

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 70 2 , pp. Meyer, N. and Müller, W. Body composition for health and performance: a survey of body composition assessment practice carried out by the Ad Hoc Research Working Group on Body Composition, Health and Performance under the auspices of the IOC Medical Commission.

British Journal of Sports Medicine , pp. Harrison, G. and Wilmore, J. Skinfold thicknesses and measurement technique. Anthropometric Standardization Reference Manual, , pp.

Heyward, V. Evaluation of body composition. Sports Medicine, 22 3 , pp. Olds, T. and Marfell-Jones, M. International standards for anthropometric assessment.

Potchefstroom ZA : International Society for Advancement of Kinanthropometry. Ackland, T. Wang, J. and Pierson, R. Anthropometry in body composition: an overview.

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences , 1 , pp. Edwards, D. Observations on the distribution of subcutaneous fat. Clinical Science , 9 , pp. Keys, A. and Brozek, J. Body fat in adult man. Physiological Reviews , 33 3 , pp. Jackson, A. and Pollock, M.

Generalized equations for predicting body density of men. British Journal of Nutrition , 40 3 , pp. and Ward, A. Generalized equations for predicting body density of women. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 12 3 , pp.

Durnin, J. and Womersley, J. Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness: measurements on men and women aged from 16 to 72 years. British Journal of Nutrition , 32 1 , pp.

Biaggi, R. and Chen, K. Comparison of air-displacement plethysmography with hydrostatic weighing and bioelectrical impedance analysis for the assessment of body composition in healthy adults—.

The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition , 69 5 , pp. Gately, P. and Wright, A. Comparison of body composition methods in overweight and obese children. Journal of Applied Physiology , 95 5 , pp.

Ginde, S. and Heymsfield, S. Air displacement plethysmography: validation in overweight and obese subjects. Obesity Research , 13 7 , pp. Peterson, M. and Siervogel, R. Development and validation of skinfold-thickness prediction equations with a 4-compartment model.

The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition , 77 5 , pp. Evans, E. and Arngrímsson, S. Skinfold prediction equation for athletes developed using a four-component model. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise , 37 11 , pp.

López-Taylor, J. and Torres-Naranjo, F. Accuracy of Anthropometric Equations for Estimating Body Fat in Professional Male Soccer Players Compared with DXA. Journal of Sports Medicine , Silva, A.

and Sardinha, L. Are skinfold-based models accurate and suitable for assessing changes in body composition in highly trained athletes?. Anyone can have their skinfolds done. If you have a goal of increasing your muscle mass, assessing skinfolds will show you whether increases in mass are due to increases of muscle, fat mass or both.

In sports, skinfolds are another tool used to assess the effectiveness of your training. Some sports have certain physique traits associated with them, such as gymnastics or diving. In endurance sports such as marathons and cycling, lower body fat levels enhance efficiency and heat dissipation.

In other sports with weight classes such as rowing or boxing, lower body fat levels will help enhance power to weight ratio compared to smaller, less muscular opponents. In team sports such as rugby, different positions on the field have different roles requiring different body compositions to effectively be able to achieve their roles.

Ongoing skinfold assessments are the most effective tool for monitoring body composition changes over time, and as an athlete, are just one of your tools that you can use to assess your progress in performance. If you are interested in knowing more about skinfold assessments, having yourself assessed, or genrally interested in getting a strategic nutrition plan to support your training and lifestyle goals, contact our Sports Dietitian Kelsey Hutton, who will be happy to help.

Kelsey can be contact by email at: kelsey. h precisionathletica. au or you can book to see her for a one-on-one below. Skinfold Assessments — why we use them and you should too.

Who should have their skinfolds done? BOOK NOW. FREE: 10 Key Habits Of Elite Athletes That Will Change Your Game Right Now! GETTING STARTED Our team approaches your fitness from all angle to improve athletic performance. Learn More.