OBJECTIVE: To compare bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) of body composition using three different methods against DXA in overweight and obese men. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Forty-three healthy overweight or obese men (ages 25 to 60 years; BMI, 28 to 43 kg/m(2)) underwent BIA assessment of body composition using the ImpediMed SFB7 (version 6; ImpediMed, Ltd., Eight Mile Plains, Queensland, Australia) in multifrequency mode (Imp-MF) and DF50 single-frequency mode (Imp-SF) and the Tanita UltimateScale (Tanita Corp., Tokyo, Japan). Validity was assessed by comparison against DXA using linear regression and limits of agreement analysis. RESULTS: All three BIA methods showed good relative agreement with DXA [Imp-MF: fat mass (FM), r(2) = 0.81; fat-free mass (FFM), r(2) = 0.81; percentage body fat (BF%), r(2) = 0.69; Imp-SF: FM, r(2) = 0.65; FFM, r(2) = 0.76; BF%, r(2) = 0.40; Tanita: BF%, r(2) = 0.44; all p < 0.001]. Absolute agreement between DXA and Imp-MF was poor, as indicated by a large bias and wide limits of agreement (bias, +/-1.96 standard deviation; FM, -6.6 +/- 7.7 kg; FFM, 8.0 +/- 7.1 kg; BF%, -7.0 +/- 6.6%). Imp-SF and Tanita exhibited a smaller bias but wide limits of agreement (Imp-SF: FM, -1.1 +/- 8.5 kg; FFM, 2.5 +/- 7.9 kg; BF%, -1.7 +/- 7.3%; Tanita: BF%, 1.2 +/- 9.5%). DISCUSSION: Compared with DXA, Imp-MF produced large bias and wide limits of agreement, and its accuracy estimating body composition in overweight or obese men was poor. Imp-SF and Tanita demonstrated little bias and may be useful for group comparisons, but their utility for assessment of body composition in individuals is limited.
OBJECTIVE: To compare bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) of body composition using three different methods against DXA in overweight and obesemen. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Forty-three healthy overweight or obesemen (ages 25 to 60 years; BMI, 28 to 43 kg/m(2)) underwent BIA assessment of body composition using the ImpediMed SFB7 (version 6; ImpediMed, Ltd., Eight Mile Plains, Queensland, Australia) in multifrequency mode (Imp-MF) and DF50 single-frequency mode (Imp-SF) and the Tanita UltimateScale (Tanita Corp., Tokyo, Japan). Validity was assessed by comparison against DXA using linear regression and limits of agreement analysis. RESULTS: All three BIA methods showed good relative agreement with DXA [Imp-MF: fat mass (FM), r(2) = 0.81; fat-free mass (FFM), r(2) = 0.81; percentage body fat (BF%), r(2) = 0.69; Imp-SF: FM, r(2) = 0.65; FFM, r(2) = 0.76; BF%, r(2) = 0.40; Tanita: BF%, r(2) = 0.44; all p < 0.001]. Absolute agreement between DXA and Imp-MF was poor, as indicated by a large bias and wide limits of agreement (bias, +/-1.96 standard deviation; FM, -6.6 +/- 7.7 kg; FFM, 8.0 +/- 7.1 kg; BF%, -7.0 +/- 6.6%). Imp-SF and Tanita exhibited a smaller bias but wide limits of agreement (Imp-SF: FM, -1.1 +/- 8.5 kg; FFM, 2.5 +/- 7.9 kg; BF%, -1.7 +/- 7.3%; Tanita: BF%, 1.2 +/- 9.5%). DISCUSSION: Compared with DXA, Imp-MF produced large bias and wide limits of agreement, and its accuracy estimating body composition in overweight or obesemen was poor. Imp-SF and Tanita demonstrated little bias and may be useful for group comparisons, but their utility for assessment of body composition in individuals is limited.
Authors: Matthew T Stratton; Robert W Smith; Patrick S Harty; Christian Rodriguez; Baylor A Johnson; Jacob R Dellinger; Abegale D Williams; Sarah J White; Marqui L Benavides; Grant M Tinsley Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Antonio Iannelli; Francesco Martini; Anty Rodolphe; Anne-Sophie Schneck; Philippe Gual; Albert Tran; Xavier Hébuterne; Jean Gugenheim Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-09-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Michael R Lowe; Karyn A Tappe; Meghan L Butryn; Rachel A Annunziato; Maria C Coletta; Christopher N Ochner; Barbara J Rolls Journal: Eat Behav Date: 2010-01-15
Authors: BongKyoo Choi; Dale Steiss; Javier Garcia-Rivas; Stacey Kojaku; Peter Schnall; Marnie Dobson; Dean Baker Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Eline Vermeiren; Marijke Ysebaert; Kim Van Hoorenbeeck; Luc Bruyndonckx; Kristof Van Dessel; Maria Van Helvoirt; Ann De Guchtenaere; Benedicte De Winter; Stijn Verhulst; Annelies Van Eyck Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2020-09-11 Impact factor: 4.016