Mal J Nutr 22(2): 183 - 189, 2016

Comparison of Waist Circumference Measured at Four Sites in Healthy Iranian Adults
Razieh Sarli & Zahra Vahdat Shariatpanahi*

Department of Clinical Nutrition,National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Faculty of Nutrition and Food Technology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Introduction: The waist circumference (WC) is a measure of central obesity in adults. The aim of this study was to compare waist circumference measured at four sites among Iranian adults. Methods: A total of 494 Iranian adults attending a university hospital for routine health examination volunteered for the study. WC measurements were taken at the superior border of the iliac crest, midpoint between the iliac crest and the lowest rib, at the umbilicus and minimal waist. Simultaneously, suprailiac (SSF) and triceps skinfold (TSF) thicknesses were measured to determine correlations with the WC measurements. Results: In both sexes, the highest mean values for WC were taken above the iliac crest, while the lowest mean values were at minimal waist. In women, mean WC from the four sites were significantly different. For men with BMI<30 kg/m2, WC from minimal waist and midpoint between the iliac crest and the lowest rib differed significantly from WC from the other sites, while those with BMI=30 kg/m2, only WC from minimal waist differed significantly from WC taken at other sites. WC measured at the superior border of the iliac crest showed significance with triceps and suprailiac subcutaneous fat. Conclusions: Among Iranian adults, the WC value differs depending on the site measured. Correlations with other indicators of body fatness are recommended for an objective assessment of obesity.

Keywords: Body mass index, skinfold thickness, waist circumference

Download full article

March 1995, Vol1 No.1
September 1995, Vol1 No.2
March 1996, Vol2 No.1
September 1996, Vol2 No.2
March 1997, Vol3 No.1
September 1997, Vol3 No.2
December 1998, Vol4 No.1&2
December 1999, Vol5 No.1&2
March 2000, Vol6 No.1
September 2000, Vol6 No.2
Mar/Sept 2001, Vol7 No.1&2
March 2002, Vol8, No.1
September 2002, Vol8, No.2
March 2003, Vol9 No.1
September 2003, Vol9 No.2
March 2004, Vol10 No.1
September 2004, Vol10 No. 2
2005, Vol 11 No.1
2005, Vo l11 No.2
2006, Vol 12 No.1
2006, Vol 12 No.2
2007, Vol 13 No.1
2007, Vol 13 No.2
March 2008, Vol 14 No.1
2008, Vol 14 No.2
2009, Vol 15 No.1
2009, Vol 15 No.2
2010, Vol 16(1)

2010, Vol 16(2)

2010, Vol 16(3)

2011, Vol 17(1)

2011, Vol 17(2)

2011, Vol 17(3)

2012, Vol 18(1)

2012, Vol 18(2)

2012, Vol 18(3)

2013, Vol 19(1)

2013, Vol 19(2)

2013, Vol 19(3)

2014, Vol 20(1)

2014, Vol 20(2)

2014, Vol 20(3)

2015, Vol 21(1)

2015, Vol 21(2)

2015, Vol 21(3)

2016, Vol 22(1)

2016, Vol 22(2)

2016, Vol 22 Supplement

2016, Vol 22(3)

2017, Vol 23(1)

2017, Vol 23(2)