Literature DB >> 12032414

Bioelectrical impedance measures in different position and vs dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA).

A Andreoli1, G Melchiorri, A De Lorenzo, I Caruso, P Sinibaldi Salimei, M Guerrisi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a safe, low-cost, non-invasive, rapid method for the assessment of body composition. It has therefore a great potential to be employed for epidemiological and clinical studies. However, many devices are available to estimate total body water (TBW), fat-free mass (FFM) and fat mass (FM) by bioelectrical impedance measurements. Moreover, bipedal devices allowing measurements in the only standing position are recently developed. They are easy and practical to use without operator, so a large diffusion can be forecasted in fields as sport and diet programs. Comparison of body composition estimation by a bipedal device with bioimpedance devices currently used, using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as reference method.
METHODS: The study was performed on 18 healthy women volunteers, age 32.0+/-10.7 years divided in two groups at different levels of body fatness. A Xitron 4000 impedance analyser, a BIA-101 RJL System, and the bipedal device Tanita were used for comparison. The measurements were performed in standing and supine position for Xitron and RJL devices. DXA measurements were performed with a total body scanner DPX, Lunar.
RESULTS: FM and FFM were not statistically different when measured with Xitron and RJL in comparison with DXA, while these variables were significantly different between Tanita and DXA measurements. No significant difference were found between measurements in the supine and standing position with the Xitron and RJL system.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that FM and FFM evaluated by bipedal device Tanita are significantly different from FM and FFM measured by DXA in both normal and obese population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12032414

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Med Phys Fitness        ISSN: 0022-4707            Impact factor:   1.637


  15 in total

1.  How do sock ply changes affect residual-limb fluid volume in people with transtibial amputation?

Authors:  Joan E Sanders; Daniel S Harrison; Katheryn J Allyn; Timothy R Myers; Marcia A Ciol; Elaine C Tsai
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2012

2.  Comparison of two bioelectrical impedance analysis instruments for determining body composition in adolescent girls.

Authors:  J Nichols; S Going; M Loftin; D Stewart; E Nowicki; J Pickrel
Journal:  Int J Body Compos Res       Date:  2006

3.  How does adding and removing liquid from socket bladders affect residual-limb fluid volume?

Authors:  Joan E Sanders; John C Cagle; Daniel S Harrison; Timothy R Myers; Kathryn J Allyn
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2013

4.  Comparison of body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in Hispanic diabetics.

Authors:  W L Beeson; M Batech; E Schultz; L Salto; A Firek; M Deleon; H Balcazar; Z Cordero-Macintyre
Journal:  Int J Body Compos Res       Date:  2010

5.  Effects of elevated vacuum on in-socket residual limb fluid volume: case study results using bioimpedance analysis.

Authors:  Joan E Sanders; Daniel S Harrison; Timothy R Myers; Katheryn J Allyn
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2011

6.  Validity of leg-to-leg bioelectrical impedance analysis to estimate body fat in obesity.

Authors:  Célia Lloret Linares; Cécile Ciangura; Jean-Luc Bouillot; Muriel Coupaye; Xavier Declèves; Christine Poitou; Arnaud Basdevant; Jean-Michel Oppert
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 4.129

7.  Validity of bioelectrical impedance analysis to estimate body composition changes after bariatric surgery in premenopausal morbidly women.

Authors:  Silvia Savastano; Annamaria Belfiore; Carolina Di Somma; Concetta Mauriello; Annalisa Rossi; Genoveffa Pizza; Annalba De Rosa; Giovanni Prestieri; Luigi Angrisani; Annamaria Colao
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2009-10-28       Impact factor: 4.129

8.  Prevalence of normal weight obesity in Switzerland: effect of various definitions.

Authors:  Pedro Marques-Vidal; Alain Pécoud; Daniel Hayoz; Fred Paccaud; Vincent Mooser; Gérard Waeber; Peter Vollenweider
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2008-07-05       Impact factor: 5.614

9.  Elevated neck circumference and associated factors in adolescents.

Authors:  Roberta de Lucena Ferretti; Isa de Pádua Cintra; Maria Aparecida Zanetti Passos; Gerson Luis de Moraes Ferrari; Mauro Fisberg
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-03-01       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Evaluation of bioelectrical impedance analysis for identifying overweight individuals at increased cardiometabolic risk: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Maxine J E Lamb; Christopher D Byrne; James F Wilson; Sarah H Wild
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.