Literature DB >> 2627926

Potential use of bioelectrical impedance of the 'whole body' and of body segments for the assessment of body composition: comparison with densitometry and anthropometry.

N J Fuller1, M Elia.   

Abstract

The value of 'whole body' and segmental impedance measurements, and of simple anthropometric methods for predicting body composition was assessed in 24 normal (14m, 10f) subjects (BMI, 18.3-28.6), using densitometry as the reference method. The contribution of segmental impedance was assessed in a separate group of 24 normal (12m, 12f) subjects (BMI, 19.8-28.8) at two frequencies (1 kHz and 50 kHz). Estimates of specific resistivities of certain individual segments (upper arm, forearm, upper leg, and lower leg) were also made in this group, and compared to those obtained from a group of 7 obese female subjects (BMI, 32.6-56.1). The bias and 95 per cent limits of agreement between densitometrically determined body composition (fat and fat-free mass, and total body water) and the alternative methods were found to vary considerably, depending on the technique and/or equations employed. Estimates of whole body composition based on impedance or resistance measurements were found to be associated with only slightly smaller limits of agreement than those made by anthropometry. The upper limb was found to have the greatest influence on whole body impedance measurements. Indeed, the forearm, which accounts for 1.3 per cent of body weight contributes 25.0 per cent to 'whole body' impedance. The estimated specific resistivities of segments were found to be considerably greater in the obese individuals than in normal female subjects (for example, 75 per cent higher for the upper arm, P less than 0.001). The results suggest that: (a) there may be a systematic, population-related, error in predicting densitometric estimates of body composition with the use of standard equations, which incorporate variables such as weight, height, skinfold thicknesses, and impedance/resistance measurements; (b) in this population, impedance or resistance measurements confer only a small advantage over simple anthropometry for predicting body composition; (c) the impedance of the arm or leg may provide a simple alternative method for assessing the composition of the whole body; and (d) the estimated specific resistivity of individual body segments may be useful for assessing the composition of those segments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2627926

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr        ISSN: 0954-3007            Impact factor:   4.016


  15 in total

1.  Determinants of vitamin D status among overweight and obese Puerto Rican adults.

Authors:  Cristina Palacios; Karen Gil; Cynthia M Pérez; Kaumudi Joshipura
Journal:  Ann Nutr Metab       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 3.374

2.  Validity of foot-to-foot bio-electrical impedance analysis body composition estimates in overweight and obese children.

Authors:  D Radley; C B Cooke; N J Fuller; B Oldroyd; J G Truscott; W A Coward; A Wright; P J Gately
Journal:  Int J Body Compos Res       Date:  2009-02

3.  Body mass index centile charts to assess fatness of British children.

Authors:  S Chinn; R J Rona
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 3.791

4.  Variants of transcription factor 7-like 2 (TCF7L2) gene predict conversion to type 2 diabetes in the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study and are associated with impaired glucose regulation and impaired insulin secretion.

Authors:  J Wang; J Kuusisto; M Vänttinen; T Kuulasmaa; J Lindström; J Tuomilehto; M Uusitupa; M Laakso
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2007-04-17       Impact factor: 10.122

5.  Association of indices of liver and adipocyte insulin resistance with 19 confirmed susceptibility loci for type 2 diabetes in 6,733 non-diabetic Finnish men.

Authors:  J Vangipurapu; A Stančáková; J Pihlajamäki; T M Kuulasmaa; T Kuulasmaa; J Paananen; J Kuusisto; E Ferrannini; M Laakso
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2010-12-12       Impact factor: 10.122

6.  A comparison of three bioelectrical impedance analyses for predicting lean body mass in a population with a large difference in muscularity.

Authors:  Noriko Ishiguro; Hiroaki Kanehisa; Masae Miyatani; Yoshihisa Masuo; Tetsuo Fukunaga
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2004-12-17       Impact factor: 3.078

7.  Estimation of maximal oxygen uptake by bioelectrical impedance analysis.

Authors:  Alexander Stahn; Elmarie Terblanche; Sven Grunert; Günther Strobel
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2005-11-01       Impact factor: 3.078

8.  Defects in insulin secretion and insulin action in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus are inherited. Metabolic studies on offspring of diabetic probands.

Authors:  I Vauhkonen; L Niskanen; E Vanninen; S Kainulainen; M Uusitupa; M Laakso
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  1998-01-01       Impact factor: 14.808

9.  Relationships between bioelectric impedance and subcutaneous adipose tissue thickness measured by LIPOMETER and skinfold calipers in children.

Authors:  T Jürimäe; K Sudi; D Payerl; A Leppik; J Jürimäe; R Müller; E Tafeit
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2003-07-09       Impact factor: 3.078

10.  Phase Angle Measurement in Healthy Human Subjects through Bio-Impedance Analysis.

Authors:  Satish Kumar; Aswini Dutt; Sandhya Hemraj; Shankar Bhat; Bhat Manipadybhima
Journal:  Iran J Basic Med Sci       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 2.699

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.