Steven Brantlov1, Lars Jødal2, Aksel Lange3, Søren Rittig3, Leigh C Ward4. 1. a Department of Procurement & Clinical Engineering , Aarhus University Hospital , Aarhus , Denmark. 2. b Department of Nuclear Medicine , Aalborg University Hospital , Aalborg , Denmark. 3. c Department of Paediatrics , Aarhus University Hospital , Aarhus , Denmark. 4. d School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences , The University of Queensland , Brisbane , Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) requires a high degree of standardisation in order to ensure valid and reproducible impedance measurements. The overall aim of this review was to study the degree to which BIA papers conducted in healthy paediatric populations (aged 0-17 years) were standardised. METHODS: Literature was identified on the basis of a systematic search of internationally-recognised electronic databases and hand searching of the reference lists of the included papers in order to identify additional relevant papers. The review was limited to lead-type BIA devices for whole-body, segmental- and focal impedance measurements. In total, 71 papers published between 1988 and 2016 were included. To evaluate the degree of standardisation of the papers, a recently published review detailing critical factors that may impact on BIA measurements in children was used as a model for structuring and extracting data. RESULTS: There was a general lack of BIA standardisation, or its reporting, in the papers under review, which hinders comparison of data between studies and could potentially lead to erroneous measurements. CONCLUSIONS: If the BIA technique should be accepted clinically for routine use in paediatric populations, there is a need for an increased focus on the importance of improved standardisation and its reporting in future studies. Consequently, this review contains recommendations for performing and reporting BIA measurements in a standardised manner.
BACKGROUND: Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) requires a high degree of standardisation in order to ensure valid and reproducible impedance measurements. The overall aim of this review was to study the degree to which BIA papers conducted in healthy paediatric populations (aged 0-17 years) were standardised. METHODS: Literature was identified on the basis of a systematic search of internationally-recognised electronic databases and hand searching of the reference lists of the included papers in order to identify additional relevant papers. The review was limited to lead-type BIA devices for whole-body, segmental- and focal impedance measurements. In total, 71 papers published between 1988 and 2016 were included. To evaluate the degree of standardisation of the papers, a recently published review detailing critical factors that may impact on BIA measurements in children was used as a model for structuring and extracting data. RESULTS: There was a general lack of BIA standardisation, or its reporting, in the papers under review, which hinders comparison of data between studies and could potentially lead to erroneous measurements. CONCLUSIONS: If the BIA technique should be accepted clinically for routine use in paediatric populations, there is a need for an increased focus on the importance of improved standardisation and its reporting in future studies. Consequently, this review contains recommendations for performing and reporting BIA measurements in a standardised manner.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bioelectrical impedance analysis; body composition; healthy; paediatrics; standardisation
Authors: Sergey Rudnev; Jane S Burns; Paige L Williams; Mary M Lee; Susan A Korrick; Tatiana Denisova; Yuri Dikov; Gennady Kozupitsa; Russ Hauser; Oleg Sergeyev Journal: Clin Nutr ESPEN Date: 2019-11-16
Authors: Katherine A Bell; Sara E Ramel; Daniel T Robinson; Carol L Wagner; Brian Scottoline; Mandy B Belfort Journal: J Perinatol Date: 2022-10-06 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Camila E Orsso; Maria Cristina Gonzalez; Michael Johannes Maisch; Andrea M Haqq; Carla M Prado Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2021-10-07 Impact factor: 4.884
Authors: Steven Brantlov; Lars Jødal; René Frydensbjerg Andersen; Aksel Lange; Søren Rittig; Leigh C Ward Journal: ScientificWorldJournal Date: 2019-05-09
Authors: Clifton J Holmes; Susan B Racette; Leslie Symonds; Ana Maria Arbeláez; Chao Cao; Andrea Granados Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-29 Impact factor: 3.390