K.V. Vybornaya ¹
M.M. Semenov ¹
S.V. Lavrinenko ¹
R.M. Radzhabkadiev ^1
1Federal Research Centre of Nutrition and Biotechnology, Moscow, Russia

Keywords: physical development, anthropometric characteristics, physical health, 7-18 year old males, body length, body mass and body mass index.

Background. Body length, body mass and body mass index are widely used as the child's health indicators both in clinical practices and for the group health standards rating purposes in the local population studies [1, 2]. Many researchers have made attempts to develop regional children’s physical development standards on small samples. As argued by S.G. Makarova (2017), the efforts to develop some regional children’s physical development standards (dominated by body length and body mass rates) are generally impractical and such studies may be beneficial only in the regional hygienic contexts.  

Multiple and contradictory regional children’s physical development standards are also known to complicate practical pediatric services as the doctors are unable to fairly rate the physical development and diagnose potential developmental conditions. The individual physical development rating analyses shall give a special priority to the genetic factors, habitual family/ ethnic diets and other factors of influence on such underage deviations from the physical development standards including excessive body length, predispositions to overweight, obesity, etc. It may be beneficial to be governed by the WHO age-specific standards in the children’s physical development rating and unification studies and for the regional physical development data matching and analyzing purposes.

Objective of the study was to obtain regional physical development data of the 7-18 year old males to make a comparative age-specific physical progress analysis.

Methods and structure of the study. We sampled for the study the 7-18 year old Moscow males (n = 243) dominated by the comprehensive school students plus the first-year university students. The sample was tested for the following anthropometric characteristics: body mass (BM, kg) tested by VEM-150 electronic medical scales; body length (BL, cm) tested by Martina anthropometer; and the body mass index computed as recommended in study [5] (kg/ m2). The test data were averaged for the age groups with the resultant data matched with the representative body mass / body length rates reported for Moscow, St. Petersburg, Omsk Oblast, Saratov Oblast and Chuvash Republic residents [4]: see Table 1. The comparative analysis was supplemented by the relevant physical development standards [3] and physical development screening reports [4].

Results and discussion. The study data and analyses were found consistent with the reported age-specific (for three age periods of ontogenesis) growth and physical development statistics [1].

Table 1. Regional physical development test rates of the 7-18 year old males: medians with arithmetic means (M±σ)

Note: bolded are the statistically significant (р<0.05) differences of our test data from the reference data

The study found the growth process being slowed down in the 8-12 year (‘second childhood’) period, with the annual body length growth estimated at 4-5 cm in the 9-12 year period. It should be emphasized that the 9 and 10 year body length growth rates were found significantly higher than the physical development standards. The body length growth was found to peak up to 13 cm per year in the 12-13 year period (pubertal peak). The 13-year-old group was tested with the relatively higher body mass and body length rates due to the high proportion of relatively tall and heavy children since this age period is known as an uneven growth time. In the 14-15 year period the body length growth rate was tested to fall to only 7 cm per year.

In the early adolescence (13-16 year) period, the musculoskeletal growth processes are known to speed up to peak in the mid-period and slow down by the end of the period [1]. Adolescent period is the time when the body growth and maturation processes are completed, with the body length growing only by 1.5cm in the 16-18 year period; although the muscles still grow to a degree as verified by the 5 kg and 9 kg body mass growth in the 16-17 and 17-18 year periods, respectively. Average body mass index were found within the WHO norms [3] for every age group, save for the 7 and 11 year-olds who were tested with the "above average" body mass index progress.

The comparative analysis found significant body length differences in the 7-10 and 13-15 year Moscow groups versus their peers from other regions of the Russian Federation. The 12 year-olds were tested with the significantly higher body length than their Chuvash Republic peers; the 16 year-olds were significantly taller than the Saratov Oblast and Chuvash Republic peers; and the 17 year-olds taller than the St. Petersburg, Saratov Oblast and Chuvash Republic peers. The 18 year-olds were tested with the insignificant interregional body length progresses. The body mass rates in our study were found significantly different from every age group in the Chuvash Republic subsample, save for the 11 and 16 year olds; and different for the 9, 10, 13 and 18 year groups in the Moscow, Omsk Oblast and St. Petersburg groups. Comparative analysis of the reference body mass data for the 7-18 year old Moscow, St. Petersburg and Omsk Oblast males found no significant differences. Note that the Chuvash Republic peers were tested with the lowest body length, body mass rates and body mass index in the sample under analysis.

Conclusion. Our sample was tested different from the reference tests of 2010-2012, with the significantly different body length rates in the 7-10 and 13-15 year groups; body mass rates in the 9, 10, 13 and 18 year groups; and body mass indices in the 10, 13 and 18 year groups. Since the regional affiliation of the reference data is rather general and the regional/ Chuvash Republic data lacks indications of the sampled cities and villages, the physical development rates could not be accurately analyzed on an ethnic basis; although the Chuvash Republic sample was generally tested lower on the body mass and body mass index scales than the peers from other regions – that may be interpreted as typical for the Chuvash ethnic age groups. The study data and analyses may be beneficial for the comparative regional children’s physical development rating studies in the Russian Federation.

References

1. Deryabin V.E. Multidimensional biometric methods for anthropologists. M., 2001. Manuscript deposited at VINITI. No. 37. 2001. 311 p.
2. Makarova S.G. Is there really need to create “regional percentile curves” of mass-growth indicators? (Commentary to the article by R.R. Kildiyarova “Rating physical development of children using percentile diagrams”). Voprosy sovremennoy pediatrii. 2017. No. 16 (5). pp. 438–440. doi: 10.15690/vsp.v16i5.1809
3. Norms for rating growth of children. Available at: https://www.who.int/childgrowth/standards/bmi_for_age/ru/
4. Rudnev S.G., Soboleva N.P., Sterlikov S.A. Bioimpedance study of body composition of Russian population. M.: TsNIIOIZ publ., 2014. 493 p. ISBN 5‐94116‐018‐6
5. Tutelyan V.A., Nikityuk D.B., Burlyaeva E.A. Using method of complex anthropometry in sports and clinical practice: guidelines. M.: Sport publ., 2018. 64 p. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=32388004

Corresponding author: dombim@mail.ru

Abstract

Objective of the study was to obtain physical development data of the 7-18 year old males living in different regions of the Russian Federation to make a comparative age-specific physical progress analysis.

Methods and structure of the study. We sampled for the study the 7-18 year old Moscow males (n = 243) dominated by the comprehensive school students plus the first-year university students. The sample was tested for the following anthropometric characteristics: body mass; body length; and body mass index. The test data were averaged for the age groups with the resultant data matched with the representative body mass / body length rates reported for Moscow, St. Petersburg, Omsk Oblast, Saratov Oblast and Chuvash Republic residents. The comparative analysis was supplemented by the relevant physical development standards and physical development screening reports.

Results and conclusions. Our sample was tested different from the reference tests of 2010-2012, with the significantly different body length rates in the 7-10 and 13-15 year groups; body mass rates in the 9, 10, 13 and 18 year groups; and body mass indices in the 10, 13 and 18 year groups. Since the regional affiliation of the reference data is rather general and the regional/ Chuvash Republic data lacks indications of the sampled cities and villages, the physical development rates could not be accurately analyzed on an ethnic basis; although the Chuvash Republic sample was generally tested lower on the body mass and body mass index scales than the peers from other regions – that may be interpreted as typical for the Chuvash ethnic age groups. The study data and analyses may be beneficial for the comparative regional children’s physical development rating studies in the Russian Federation.