Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Body composition: validity of segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis.
Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2008; 17(4):586-91.AP

Abstract

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) measures the impedance associated with passage of an alternating current through the body which is proportional to total body water (TBW) and therefore can provide expedient estimates of body composition. However, little validity information is available for commercially available bathroom scale type devices which perform whole body estimates from segmental (lower limb) measurements. This study therefore compared body composition estimates between a commercially available segmental BIA device (Tanita BC-532) and four compartment criterion values. Body composition of nine males and nine females (mean +/- SD: 37.7 +/- 18.7 yr; 170.7 +/- 5.3 cm; 68.38 +/- 9.7 kg) was determined via BIA and a four compartment model incorporating measures of body density, TBW and bone mineral mass. While the mean %BF and fat free mass (FFM) values for both methods were not significantly different, considerable intra-individual differences were observed. BIA values varied from the four compartment values by -3.0 to 4.4 %BF and -3.3 to 1.9 kg FFM. The BIA estimates of TBW were significantly different from the criterion measures and intraindividual differences displayed a large range (-0.6 to 3.6 kg). Significant underestimations of TBW via BIA are concerning given that this is the parameter initially established by this method. Furthermore, the BIA data resulted in a FFM hydration value of 68.5% which was significantly (p<0.001) lower than the four compartment value of 72.0%. In conclusion, the BIA device tested displayed poor individual accuracy for the estimation of body composition compared with a four compartment criterion method.

Authors+Show Affiliations

School of Education, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study

Language

eng

PubMed ID

19114394

Citation

LaForgia, Joe, et al. "Body Composition: Validity of Segmental Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis." Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition, vol. 17, no. 4, 2008, pp. 586-91.
LaForgia J, Gunn S, Withers RT. Body composition: validity of segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2008;17(4):586-91.
LaForgia, J., Gunn, S., & Withers, R. T. (2008). Body composition: validity of segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 17(4), 586-91.
LaForgia J, Gunn S, Withers RT. Body Composition: Validity of Segmental Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2008;17(4):586-91. PubMed PMID: 19114394.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Body composition: validity of segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis. AU - LaForgia,Joe, AU - Gunn,Simon, AU - Withers,Robert T, PY - 2008/12/31/entrez PY - 2008/12/31/pubmed PY - 2009/4/8/medline SP - 586 EP - 91 JF - Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition JO - Asia Pac J Clin Nutr VL - 17 IS - 4 N2 - Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) measures the impedance associated with passage of an alternating current through the body which is proportional to total body water (TBW) and therefore can provide expedient estimates of body composition. However, little validity information is available for commercially available bathroom scale type devices which perform whole body estimates from segmental (lower limb) measurements. This study therefore compared body composition estimates between a commercially available segmental BIA device (Tanita BC-532) and four compartment criterion values. Body composition of nine males and nine females (mean +/- SD: 37.7 +/- 18.7 yr; 170.7 +/- 5.3 cm; 68.38 +/- 9.7 kg) was determined via BIA and a four compartment model incorporating measures of body density, TBW and bone mineral mass. While the mean %BF and fat free mass (FFM) values for both methods were not significantly different, considerable intra-individual differences were observed. BIA values varied from the four compartment values by -3.0 to 4.4 %BF and -3.3 to 1.9 kg FFM. The BIA estimates of TBW were significantly different from the criterion measures and intraindividual differences displayed a large range (-0.6 to 3.6 kg). Significant underestimations of TBW via BIA are concerning given that this is the parameter initially established by this method. Furthermore, the BIA data resulted in a FFM hydration value of 68.5% which was significantly (p<0.001) lower than the four compartment value of 72.0%. In conclusion, the BIA device tested displayed poor individual accuracy for the estimation of body composition compared with a four compartment criterion method. SN - 0964-7058 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19114394/Body_composition:_validity_of_segmental_bioelectrical_impedance_analysis_ L2 - http://apjcn.nhri.org.tw/server/APJCN/17/4/586.pdf DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -