Soofia Khan1, Stavra A Xanthakos1,2, Lindsey Hornung3, Catalina Arce-Clachar1,2, Robert Siegel2,4, Heidi J Kalkwarf1,2. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center. 2. Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine. 3. Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology. 4. Division of Cardiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The accuracy of different bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices for assessing body composition in children with obesity is unclear. We determined the relative accuracy of 2 BIA devices compared to dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in obese and severely obese children. METHODS: We measured body composition in a cross-sectional study of 78 obese children by a handheld single frequency tetrapolar BIA device (Omron), a stationary multifrequency octopolar BIA device (InBody 370) and DXA. Intermethod agreement was assessed by intraclass correlations, paired t tests, and Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS: Participants (37% female, age 14.8 ± 2.7 years) had mean (±standard deviation) body mass index of 36.7 ± 7.5 kg/m, body fat percentage of 46.4% ± 5.2%, and appendicular lean mass of 22.5 ± 6.0 kg by DXA. Intraclass correlations with DXA for body fat percentage were 0.39 and 0.87 for single frequency tetrapolar and multifrequency octopolar BIA devices, respectively. The single frequency tetrapolar BIA underestimated body fat percentage by 5.5% ± 2.9% (P < 0.0001). Differences between the multifrequency octopolar BIA and DXA for body fat percentage (-1.1% ± 2.8%) and appendicular lean mass (-0.3 ± 1.4 kg) were small, and 95% limits of agreement were approximately ±5%. CONCLUSIONS: BIA machines vary in relative accuracy in measuring body composition in children who are obese and severely obese. The multifrequency octopolar BIA device accurately estimated body fat percentage and appendicular lean mass relative to DXA and has the advantage of point of care performance.
OBJECTIVES: The accuracy of different bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices for assessing body composition in children with obesity is unclear. We determined the relative accuracy of 2 BIA devices compared to dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in obese and severely obese children. METHODS: We measured body composition in a cross-sectional study of 78 obese children by a handheld single frequency tetrapolar BIA device (Omron), a stationary multifrequency octopolar BIA device (InBody 370) and DXA. Intermethod agreement was assessed by intraclass correlations, paired t tests, and Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS: Participants (37% female, age 14.8 ± 2.7 years) had mean (±standard deviation) body mass index of 36.7 ± 7.5 kg/m, body fat percentage of 46.4% ± 5.2%, and appendicular lean mass of 22.5 ± 6.0 kg by DXA. Intraclass correlations with DXA for body fat percentage were 0.39 and 0.87 for single frequency tetrapolar and multifrequency octopolar BIA devices, respectively. The single frequency tetrapolar BIA underestimated body fat percentage by 5.5% ± 2.9% (P < 0.0001). Differences between the multifrequency octopolar BIA and DXA for body fat percentage (-1.1% ± 2.8%) and appendicular lean mass (-0.3 ± 1.4 kg) were small, and 95% limits of agreement were approximately ±5%. CONCLUSIONS: BIA machines vary in relative accuracy in measuring body composition in children who are obese and severely obese. The multifrequency octopolar BIA device accurately estimated body fat percentage and appendicular lean mass relative to DXA and has the advantage of point of care performance.
Authors: Ursula G Kyle; Ingvar Bosaeus; Antonio D De Lorenzo; Paul Deurenberg; Marinos Elia; José Manuel Gómez; Berit Lilienthal Heitmann; Luisa Kent-Smith; Jean-Claude Melchior; Matthias Pirlich; Hermann Scharfetter; Annemie M W J Schols; Claude Pichard Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: Aaron S Kelly; Sarah E Barlow; Goutham Rao; Thomas H Inge; Laura L Hayman; Julia Steinberger; Elaine M Urbina; Linda J Ewing; Stephen R Daniels Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-09-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Dale A Schoeller; Frances A Tylavsky; David J Baer; William C Chumlea; Carrie P Earthman; Thomas Fuerst; Tamara B Harris; Steven B Heymsfield; Mary Horlick; Timothy G Lohman; Henry C Lukaski; John Shepherd; Roger M Siervogel; Lori G Borrud Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Nicole E Jensky-Squires; Christina M Dieli-Conwright; Amerigo Rossuello; David N Erceg; Scott McCauley; E Todd Schroeder Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2008-03-18 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: Ching S Wan; Leigh C Ward; Jocelyn Halim; Megan L Gow; Mandy Ho; Julie N Briody; Kelvin Leung; Chris T Cowell; Sarah P Garnett Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2014-10-03 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: María Rivera-Ochoa; Javier Brazo-Sayavera; Barbara Vizmanos-Lamotte; Asier Mañas; Juan Ricardo López-Taylor; Marcela González-Gross; Amelia Guadalupe-Grau Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-02 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Geraldo A Maranhao Neto; Iuliia Pavlovska; Anna Polcrova; Jeffrey I Mechanick; Maria M Infante-Garcia; Jose Medina-Inojosa; Ramfis Nieto-Martinez; Francisco Lopez-Jimenez; Juan P Gonzalez-Rivas Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-01-22 Impact factor: 4.241