Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBurrows, Mark
dc.contributor.authorNevill, Alan M.
dc.contributor.authorBird, Steve
dc.contributor.authorSimpson, David
dc.date.accessioned2007-12-05T10:16:54Z
dc.date.available2007-12-05T10:16:54Z
dc.date.issued2003
dc.date.submitted2007-12
dc.identifier.citationBritish Journal of Sports Medicine, 37: 67–71
dc.identifier.issn03063674
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bjsm.37.1.67
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/14994
dc.description.abstractObjective: To explore potential factors that could be associated with low bone mineral density (BMD) in female endurance runners. Methods: Fifty two female endurance runners (1500 m to marathon), aged 18–44 years, took part. Body fat percentage, lumbar spine BMD, and femoral neck BMD were measured using the Hologic QDR 4500w bone densitometer. Data on training, menstrual cycle status, osteoporosis, and health related factors were obtained by questionnaire. Dietary variables were assessed from a prospective seven day dietary record of macronutrients and micronutrients. Results: The mean (SD) lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD were 1.11 (0.11) and 0.89 (0.12) g/cm2 respectively. A backward elimination regression analysis showed that age, body mass, body fat, distance run, magnesium, and zinc intake were the variables significantly associated with BMD. Lumbar spine BMD (g/cm2) = -1.90 + (0.0486 ´ age (years)) + (0.342 ´ log mass (kg)) - (0.000861 ´ age2 (years)) - (0.00128 ´ distance (km/week)), with an R2 = 30.1% (SEE = 0.089 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.23); p<0.001). Femoral neck BMD (g/cm2) = -2.51 - (0.00989 ´ age (years)) + (0.720 ´ log mass (kg)) + (0.000951 ´ magnesium (mg/day)) -(0.0289 ´ zinc (mg/day)) - (0.00821 ´ body fat (%)) - (0.00226 ´ distance (km/week)), with an R2 = 50.2% (SEE = 0.100 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.22); p<0.001). The negative association between skeletal BMD and distance run suggested that participants who ran longer distances had a lower BMD of the lumbar spine and femoral neck. Further, the results indicated a positive association between body mass and BMD, and a negative association between body fat and BMD. Conclusions: The results suggest a negative association between endurance running distance and lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD, with a positive association between body mass and femoral neck and lumbar spine BMD. However, longitudinal studies are required to assess directly the effect of endurance running and body mass on BMD, and to see if the addition of alternative exercise that would increase lean body mass would have a positive effect on BMD and therefore help to prevent osteoporosis.
dc.language.ison/a
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing
dc.relation.urlhttp://bjsm.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/37/1/67
dc.subjectBone mineral density
dc.subjectEndurance runners
dc.subjectFemale
dc.titlePhysiological factors associated with low bone mineral density in female endurance runners
dc.typeArticle
refterms.dateFOA2018-08-21T10:12:51Z
html.description.abstractObjective: To explore potential factors that could be associated with low bone mineral density (BMD) in female endurance runners. Methods: Fifty two female endurance runners (1500 m to marathon), aged 18–44 years, took part. Body fat percentage, lumbar spine BMD, and femoral neck BMD were measured using the Hologic QDR 4500w bone densitometer. Data on training, menstrual cycle status, osteoporosis, and health related factors were obtained by questionnaire. Dietary variables were assessed from a prospective seven day dietary record of macronutrients and micronutrients. Results: The mean (SD) lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD were 1.11 (0.11) and 0.89 (0.12) g/cm2 respectively. A backward elimination regression analysis showed that age, body mass, body fat, distance run, magnesium, and zinc intake were the variables significantly associated with BMD. Lumbar spine BMD (g/cm2) = -1.90 + (0.0486 ´ age (years)) + (0.342 ´ log mass (kg)) - (0.000861 ´ age2 (years)) - (0.00128 ´ distance (km/week)), with an R2 = 30.1% (SEE = 0.089 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.23); p<0.001). Femoral neck BMD (g/cm2) = -2.51 - (0.00989 ´ age (years)) + (0.720 ´ log mass (kg)) + (0.000951 ´ magnesium (mg/day)) -(0.0289 ´ zinc (mg/day)) - (0.00821 ´ body fat (%)) - (0.00226 ´ distance (km/week)), with an R2 = 50.2% (SEE = 0.100 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.22); p<0.001). The negative association between skeletal BMD and distance run suggested that participants who ran longer distances had a lower BMD of the lumbar spine and femoral neck. Further, the results indicated a positive association between body mass and BMD, and a negative association between body fat and BMD. Conclusions: The results suggest a negative association between endurance running distance and lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD, with a positive association between body mass and femoral neck and lumbar spine BMD. However, longitudinal studies are required to assess directly the effect of endurance running and body mass on BMD, and to see if the addition of alternative exercise that would increase lean body mass would have a positive effect on BMD and therefore help to prevent osteoporosis.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Nevill bjsm 2003.pdf
Size:
314.1Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record