[Downloaded free from http://www.amhsjournal.org on Thursday, June 23, 2016, IP: 175.142.130.

39]

Original Article

Screening of nutritional status of male

undergraduates in Kolkata using anthropometric
indices
Pallav Sengupta, Elzbieta Krajewska-Kulak1
Lecturer, Department of Physiology,Vidyasagar Collge for Women, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India, 1Department of Integrated Medical
Care, Medical University of Bialystok, Poland

ABSTRACT
Context and Aims: Anthropometric measurements can easily reflect the nutritional status of an individual. The purpose of this study is to
investigate the magnitude of obesity and undernutrition based on body mass index (BMI) and direct, derived anthropometric variables,
among college students of Kolkata. Subjects and Methods: Anthropometry is generally considered as the single most easily obtainable,
inexpensive, and non-invasive method that reflects body composition. A total of 100 male students aged 18-22 years of different
undergraduate colleges of Kolkata have participated in this study. Anthropometric profiles (a total of 24 direct and derived variables)
including weight, height, waist, and hip circumferences were measured. Results: Results showed 14.68% of the studied population are
underweight, 9.25% are overweight, and 0.89% is obese, as per BMI. The present report showed higher prevalence of normal BMI (75.16%)
in male college students, whereas obesity was almost found to absent among participants. Conclusion: The findings of the present report
indicated occurrence of almost normal nutritional status among male undergraduates of Kolkata based on BMI and anthropometric indices

Key words: Anthropometry, body mass index, conicity index, obesity, WHR

Introduction situations where resources are severely limited, however,

Anthropometry is a practical and immediately applicable
technique for assessing nutritional status, which can provide
useful insights into the nutrition and health situation of entire
population. Anthropometric indicators are less accurate
than clinical and biochemical techniques when it comes
to assessing individual nutritional status. In many field
anthropometry can be used as a screening device to identify
individuals at risk of undernutrition, followed by a more
elaborate investigation using other techniques.[1] Similarly,
growth monitoring permits the detection of individuals with
faltering growth, who can then be appropriately referred to
specialized care.[2] Many anthropometric indicators are used,
viz., mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC), body mass index
of Quetlet (BMI).[3]

Access this article online

Quick Response Code:
Website:
www.amhsjournal.org
DOI:
10.4103/2321-4848.144320
Malnutrition in men can result in reduced productivity, slow
recovery from illnesses, and increased susceptibility to
infections. Malnutrition denotes impairment of health arising
either from deficiency or excess or imbalance of nutrients in the
body. Young adulthood is an important period in the individual’s
life. They represent around 20% of the global world’s population
and around 84% of them are found in developing countries;

Corresponding Author:
Dr. Pallav Sengupta, Department of Physiology,Vidyasagar College for Women, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India.
E-mail: sunny_pallav_1984@yahoo.co.in

150 Archives of Medicine and Health Sciences / Jul-Dec 2014 / Vol 2 | Issue 2
[Downloaded free from http://www.amhsjournal.org on Thursday, June 23, 2016, IP: 175.142.130.39]
Sengupta and Krajewska-Kulak: Nutritional screening among male undergraduates of Kolkata
constituted 22.8% of the population in India as on 1st March
2000. Malnutrition among Indian population has long been
recognized as a serious problem, but national-level data on
levels and causes of malnutrition have been scarce.[4]
Though, for individual assessment of body composition,
anthropometry is being replaced by more accurate but
also more complicated methods, calculation of individual
BMI from weight and height, however, still remains a
valid tool for epidemiological studies on assessment of
nutritional status. Typically, the composition of human
body is assessed to determine percentage of body fat.
However, it is now clear that in addition to the amount of
fat in the body, its topography particularly the abdominal
fat deposition is considered to be the most atherogenic,
diabetogenic, and hypertensiogenic fat deposition of the
human body.[5-9] Thus, the aim of this study is to determine
malnutrition/obesity pattern and also to investigate the
relationship of various anthropometric measures with body
composition variables among college students of Kolkata,
India. Although data that can be used to evaluate trends
are limited, some insight can be gained into the nutritional
situation of selected population.
Materials and Methods
Participants
In this cross-sectional study, male (n = 50) subjects between
18-22 years of age were randomly selected as participants.
Subjects were undergraduate students of different colleges
of Kolkata. The entire experimental protocol was explained
to them to allay their apprehension. Consent from each
participant was taken for conducting the study, and the
experiments were carried out following Institutional ethical
permission. Subjects were instructed to take their last
meal at least two hours before conducting the test in order
to avoid the specific dynamic action (SDA) of food. All the
experiments were carried out and measurements were
taken in temperature of 20o-25oC and relative humidity of
about 45-50% in winter season in India, both in control
subjects and fishermen, to avoid seasonal influence on
fitness pattern. To minimize the experimenter bias, each
measurement was taken for three times, and the mean was
represented as final result. Subjects with any type of disease,
specially cardiac and respiratory ailments, were not taken for
experiments, only healthy subjects are considered for each
experiment. Each subject was given sufficient rest before
each experiment to get accurate result.
Assessment body mass index
The BMI of Quetelet is the statistical measure, which
compares a person’s weight and height by the following
Archives of Medicine and Health Sciences / Jul-Dec 2014 / Vol 2 | Issue 2 151
formula:[10,11] BMI = mass (kg)/(Height in m)2. The WHO[12]
regard a BMI of less than 18.5 as underweight and may
indicate malnutrition, while a BMI greater than 25 is
considered overweight and above 30 is considered
obese.
Measurement of body fat percentage
Body fat can be estimated from the body mass index or BMI.
There is a linear relationship between densitometrically-
determined body fat percentage (PBF) and BMI, taking age
and gender into account. Based on which following prediction
formulas have been derived, which showed a valid estimate
of body fat at all ages, in males and females. But, in obese
subjects, the prediction formulas are slightly overestimated.
The prediction error is comparable with other methods of
estimating body fat percentage, such as skinfold thickness
measurements or bioelectrical impedance.[13-15] The following
formula to predict body fat percentage is based on current
BMI, age, and gender: PBF = (1.20 × BMI) + (0.23 ×
Age) − 10.8-5.4.
Determination of body surface area
Body surface area (BSA) is the measured or calculated
surface of a body. Various calculations have been published
to arrive at the BSA without direct measurement. Dubois
and Dubois formula was used for estimating body surface
BSA.[16]
Anthropometric profiles
A total of 24 metric measurements were taken for each
subject including direct and derived anthropometric and
physiological variables. The anthropometric measurements
taken for each subject were: Height, weight, eye height
standing, elbow rest height standing, abdominal extension,
sitting height, knee height, buttock-to-knee length, five
circumferences i.e. mid-upper arm (MUAC), thigh (TC),
calf (CC), minimum waist (WC), and maximum hip (BC).
However, in the present communication, 13 directly
measured variables and 11 derived variables: Body surface
area (BSA), body mass index (BMI), body adiposity index
(BAI), fat mass (FM), fat mass index (FMI), fat free mass
(FFM), fat free mass index (FFMI), waist-to-height ratio
(WHTR), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), MUAC-to-height ratio
(MHR), and conicity index (C-index) were included. All
anthropometric measurements were made by using
standard anthropometric techniques as proposed by
Lohman et al.[17] All the derived variables were computed
using standard equations.[18]
Statistical analysis
Results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation
(SD). If differences between groups were established, the
values of the treated groups were compared with those of
[Downloaded free from http://www.amhsjournal.org on Thursday, June 23, 2016, IP: 175.142.130.39]

Sengupta and Krajewska-Kulak: Nutritional screening among male undergraduates of Kolkata

the control group by a modified t-test. A value of P < 0.05
was interpreted as statistically significant.[19]
Results
Anthropometric profiles showed the prevalence of normal
BMI and malnutrition among the studied population based
on PBF, WC, and WHR, which are presented in Table 1. It
also represents comparative aspects of physical variables
(BSA and BMI).
undergraduate college students was calculated according
to critical limits of BMI as recommended by WHO.[20]
Table 1 shows various physical parameters and indicators
of nutritional status, which showed normal BSA in male
students.
Table 2 presents the distribution of all subjects according to BMI
classification. Though it was observed that most of the subjects
have normal BMI (75.16%), the results indicated that occurrence
of undernutrition was also observed among students.

The frequency of overweight and underweight students is Among male students, only 9.25% of the students are found
presented in Table 2. The overall prevalence of obesity (BMI to be overweight. Conversely, they showed a higher degree
> 30.00) was almost absent in the studied sample, but the of undernutrition (14.68%) as found on the basis of BMI.
prevalence to be overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9) was observed
in males (9.25%). But, most of the student populations are Table 1: Anthropometric variables (both direct and derived) of
found to have normal range of body weight (75.16%), as found undergraduate male (n=100) college students
on the basis of BMI. It may be noted that this estimation Variables Male
is based on an indirect technique, i.e. anthropometry and Mean SD
Age (years) 20.9 2.25
International Classification of BMI cut-off points.[12] Physical parameters
Height (cm) 166.6 7.21
Weight (kg) 59.3 7.50
Figure 1 describes some common anthropometric measures BSA (m2) 1.77 0.21
of college students. Some of these parameters also indicate Body mass index (kg/m2) 21.9 2.49
the tendency towards obesity of male students. Adiposity measures
PBF (%) 20.5 1.73
Fat mass (kg) 12.1 3.88
Discussion Fat mass index (kg/m2)
Fat free mass (kg)
4.48
47.1
1.76
4.25
Fat free mass index (kg/m2) 17.40 1.84
BMI is considered as a better index for assessing nutritional Body adiposity index 30.01 4.44
Waist-to-hip ratio 0.92 0.02
status, because it does away with the need of height-weight Waist-to-height ratio 0.46 0.02
tables and is independent of type of physical frame.[20] MUAC-for-height 0.16 0.01
Therefore, in the present study, the body composition of C- index 1.16 0.09

Figure 1: Direct anthropometric measures of male (n = 100) college students

152 Archives of Medicine and Health Sciences / Jul-Dec 2014 / Vol 2 | Issue 2
[Downloaded free from http://www.amhsjournal.org on Thursday, June 23, 2016, IP: 175.142.130.39]

Sengupta and Krajewska-Kulak: Nutritional screening among male undergraduates of Kolkata

Table 2: Distribution of BMI and prevalence of malnutrition/obesity among undergraduate college students of Kolkata (n=100)
Age (in years) Sample size Obese Overweight Normal Underweight
(BMI>30) (BMI 24.9-29.9) (BMI 18.5-24.9) (BMI<18.5)
n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%)
18-20 44 (44.00) 0 (0.00) 5 (11.36) 30 (68.18) 9 (20.45)
20-22 56 (56.00) 1 (1.78) 4 (7.14) 46 (82.14) 5 (8.92)
Total 100% — 0.89% — 9.25% — 75.16% — 14.68%
Figures in parenthesis indicate percentages

But, it could be due to their young age, thus tends to being
leaner than obese.[21-23]
Morphometric analysis of the body is virtually the investigation
of the process of life, which reflects the general health
status of an individual.[24,25] From the public health point-
of-view, anthropometry is the most valid measure for
the identification of sub-clinical forms of malnutrition.[26]
Various anthropometric indices including BMI and body
circumferences are available, those play an important role
in predicting the health status. In this present study, normal
range of stature, eye height, acromial height, elbow rest
height, abdominal extension, and mean upper arm, thigh and
waist circumferences were found in male college students. WC
and abdominal extension reflects abdominal fat distribution
in males, which has again reflected in WHR. Among WC and
WHR, WC is considered to be a better index for fat location
and also for predicting lipid profile in adult.[27,31]
On the other hand, it is well known that MUAC is an estimate of
energy store and protein mass of the body, which is an indirect
estimate of strength,[27] which has found to be more in male
students. As the studied population is comprised of young
adults, they also showed expected higher values in MUAC and
TC, which are also indicator of distribution of muscle mass.
Conclusion
Thus, the present study reports about the normal range of BMI
and body weight among young male undergraduate students.
Abbreviations
BAI Body Adiposity Index
BMI Body Mass Index
BSA Body Surface Area
CC Calf Circumference
FFM Fat Free Mass
FFMI Fat Free Mass Index
FM Fat Mass
FMI Fat Mass Index
MHR MUAC-for-height
MUAC Mean Upper Arm Circumference
PBF Percentage of Body Fat
SDA Specific Dynamic Action
TC Thigh Circumference
WHR Waist-to-hip ratio
WHTR Waist-to-height ratio
Acknowledgment
Authors’ thank the Principal, Vidyasagar College for Women,
University of Calcutta for providing valuable guidance; the faculty
of Department of Physiology, Vidyasagar College for Women and
B.Sc. Final Year Physiology Honors students.
References
1. Sengupta P. Assessment of physical fitness status of young
Sikkimese residing in high-hill temperate regions of Eastern
Sikkim. Asian J Med Sci 2011;2:169-74.
2. Jung SH, Jung SH. Surveying dimensions and characteristics
of Korean ears for the ergonomic design of ear-related
products. Int J Ind Ergon 2003;31:361-73.
3. Sengupta P, Chaudhuri P, Bhattacharya K. A small-scale
cross-sectional study for the assessment of cardiorespiratory
fitness in relation to body composition and morphometric
characters in fishermen of Araku valley, Andhra Pradesh,
India. Int J Prev Med 2014;5:557-62.
4. Behrman RE, Kliegman RM, Jenson HB, editors. Nelson’s
Textbook of pediatrics. 16th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders;
2000. p. 32-50.
5. Sengupta P. Challenge of infertility: How protective the yoga
therapy is? Ancient Sci Life 2012;32:61-2.
6. Chatterjee D, Chanda S, Bandyapadhyay AR. A comparative
study on anthropometry and central body fat distribution of
Pre-menacheal and Post-menacheal Santal girls of Jharkhand.
Stud Tribes Tribals 2005;3:133-6.
7. Sengupta P, Sahoo S. A Fitness Assessment Study among
Young Fishermen of Coastal Areas of West Bengal, India.
South East Asia J Pub Health 2011;1:28-34.
8. Mueller WH, Meiniger JC, Liehr P, Chen W, Chandler PS.
Conicity: A new index of body fat distribution-what does it
tell us? Am J Hum Biol 1996;8:489-96.
9. Chaudhuri P, Sengupta P, Ganguly S, Haldar RP. Emerging
Trend of Gym Practice and Its Consequence over Physical
and Physiological Fitness. Biol Exer 2012;8:49-58.
10. Keys A, Fidanza F, Karvonen MJ, Kimura N, Taylor HL. Indices
of relative weight and obesity. J Chronic Dis 1972;25:329-43.
11. Eknoyan G. Adolphe Quetelet (1796-1874) — the average man
and indices of obesity. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008;23:47-51.

Archives of Medicine and Health Sciences / Jul-Dec 2014 / Vol 2 | Issue 2 153
[Downloaded free from http://www.amhsjournal.org on Thursday, June 23, 2016, IP: 175.142.130.39]
Sengupta and Krajewska-Kulak: Nutritional screening among male undergraduates of Kolkata
12. WHO: Global Database on Body Mass Index. BMI
Classification. World Health Organization website. Available
from: http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp? introPage=intro_3.
html. [Last accessed on 2011 Apr 26].
13. Deurenberg P, Westrate JA, Seidell JC. Body mass index as
a measure of body fatness: Age- and sex-specific prediction
formulas. Br J Nutr 1991;65:105-14.
14. Deurenberg P, Yap M, van Staveren WA. Body mass index
and percent body fat. A meta-analysis among different ethnic
groups. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1998;22:1164-71.
15. Wellens RJ, Roche AF, Khamis HJ, Jackson AS, Pollock ML,
Siervogel RM. Relationships between body mass index and
body composition. Obes Res 1996;4:35-44.
16. DuBois D, DuBois EF. A formula to estimate the approximate
surface area if height and weight be known. Nutrition
1989;5:303-11.
17. Lohman TG, Roche AF, Martorell R. Anthropometric
standardization reference manual. Chicago: Human Kinetics
Books; 1998.
18. World Health Organization. Physical status: The use and
interpretation of anthropometry. Report of the WHO Expert
Committee, Technical Report Series, No. 854. Geneva: World
Health Organization; 1995.
19. Das D, Das A. Statistics in Biology and Psychology. 4th ed.
Calcutta: Academic Publishers; 2005.
20. World Health Organization. Obesity: Preventing and managing
the global epidemic. Report of the WHO Consultation on
Obesity, Technical Report Series, No. 854. Geneva: World
Health Organization; 1998.
21. Gopinath N, Chadha SL, Sood AK. Epidemiological studies
of hypertensives in young Delhi urban population. Indian J
Med Res 1994;99:32-7.
22. Sengupta P, Bhattacharya K. Effects of high altitude and
nutritional status over the physical fitness of young residents
154 Archives of Medicine and Health Sciences / Jul-Dec 2014 / Vol 2 | Issue 2
of Pokhara, Western Nepal. South East Asia J Pub Health
2012;2:34-8.
23. Gopalan C. Obesity in the Indian urban middle class. NFI
Bull 1998;19:19.
24. Dutta S, Joshi KR, Sengupta P, Bhattacharya K. Unilateral
and bilateral cryptorchidism and its effect on the testicular
morphology, histology, accessory sex organs and sperm count
in Laboratory Mice. J Hum Repro Sci 2013;6:106-10.
25. Sengupta P, Chaudhuri P, Bhattacharya K. Male Reproductive
Health and Yoga. Int J Yoga 2013;6:87-95.
26. Sengupta P, Chaudhuri P. Screening obesity by direct and
derived anthropometric indices with evaluation of physical
efficiency among female college students of Kolkata. Ann
Med Health Sci Res 2013;3:517-22.
27. Sengupta P. Health Impacts of Yoga and Pranayama: An Art-
of-the-state Review. Int J Prev Med 2012;3:444-58.
28. Sengupta P. Environmental and occupational exposure of
metals and their role in male reproductive functions. Drug
Chem Toxicol 2013;36:353-68.
29. Sengupta P, Sahoo S. Evaluation of Health Status of Fishers:
Prediction of Cardiovascular Fitness and Anaerobic Power.
World J Life Sci Med Res 2011;1:25-30.
30. Sengupta P, Sahoo S. A Cross Sectional Study to Evaluate
the Fitness Pattern among the Young Fishermen of Coastal
Orissa. Indian J Pub Health Res Dev 2013;4:171-5.
31. Sengupta P, Sahoo S. An Ergonomic Assessment and Fitness
Evaluation of Young Male Tea Factory Workers in Dooars,
West Bengal. Prog in Health Sci 2012;2:51-7.
How to cite this article: Sengupta P, Krajewska-Kulak E. Screening of
nutritional status of male undergraduates in Kolkata using anthropometric
indices. Arch Med Health Sci 2014;2:150-4.
Source of Support: Nil, Conflict of Interest: None declared.