Jonathan P Bennett1, Yong En Liu2, Brandon K Quon2, Nisa N Kelly2, Michael C Wong3, Samantha F Kennedy4, Dominic C Chow5, Andrea K Garber6, Ethan J Weiss7, Steven B Heymsfield4, John A Shepherd3. 1. Graduate Program in Human Nutrition, University of Hawai'i Manoa, Agricultural Science Building, 1955 East-West Rd, Honolulu, HI, 96822, USA; Department of Epidemiology, University of Hawai'i Cancer Center, 701 Ilalo St, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA. Electronic address: jb99@hawaii.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology, University of Hawai'i Cancer Center, 701 Ilalo St, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA. 3. Graduate Program in Human Nutrition, University of Hawai'i Manoa, Agricultural Science Building, 1955 East-West Rd, Honolulu, HI, 96822, USA; Department of Epidemiology, University of Hawai'i Cancer Center, 701 Ilalo St, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA. 4. Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, 6400 Perkins Rd, Baton Rouge, LA, 70808, USA. 5. John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii, 651 Ilalo St, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA. 6. Division of Adolescent & Young Adult Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California Street, Suite 245, CA, 94118, USA. 7. University of California School of Medicine, 555 Mission Bay Blvd South, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The accurate assessment of total body and regional body circumferences, volumes, and compositions are critical to monitor physical activity and dietary interventions, as well as accurate disease classifications including obesity, metabolic syndrome, sarcopenia, and lymphedema. We assessed body composition and anthropometry estimates provided by a commercial 3-dimensional optical (3DO) imaging system compared to criterion measures. METHODS: Participants of the Shape Up! Adults study were recruited for similar sized stratifications by sex, age (18-40, 40-60, >60 years), BMI (under, normal, overweight, obese), and across five ethnicities (non-Hispanic [NH] Black, NH White, Hispanic, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander). All participants received manual anthropometry assessments, duplicate whole-body 3DO (Styku S100), and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans. 3DO estimates provided by the manufacturer for anthropometry and body composition were compared to the criterion measures using concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and Bland-Altman analysis. Test-retest precision was assessed by root mean square error (RMSE) and coefficient of variation. RESULTS: A total of 188 (102 female) participants were included. The overall fat free mass (FFM) as measured by DXA (54.1 ± 15.2 kg) and 3DO (55.3 ± 15.0 kg) showed a small mean difference of 1.2 ± 3.4 kg (95% limits of agreement -7.0 to +5.6) and the CCC was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96-0.98). The CCC for FM was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.94-0.97) and the mean difference of 1.3 ± 3.4 kg (95% CI: -5.5 to +8.1) reflected the difference in FFM measures. 3DO anthropometry and body composition measurements showed high test-retest precision for whole body volume (1.1 L), fat mass (0.41 kg), percent fat (0.60%), arm and leg volumes, (0.11 and 0.21 L, respectively), and waist and hip circumferences (all <0.60 cm). No group differences were observed when stratified by body mass index, sex, or race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: The anthropometric and body composition estimates provided by the 3DO scanner are precise and accurate to criterion methods if offsets are considered. This method offers a rapid, broadly available, and automated method of body composition assessment regardless of body size. Further studies are recommended to examine the relationship between measurements obtained by 3DO scans and metabolic health in healthy and clinical populations. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
BACKGROUND: The accurate assessment of total body and regional body circumferences, volumes, and compositions are critical to monitor physical activity and dietary interventions, as well as accurate disease classifications including obesity, metabolic syndrome, sarcopenia, and lymphedema. We assessed body composition and anthropometry estimates provided by a commercial 3-dimensional optical (3DO) imaging system compared to criterion measures. METHODS: Participants of the Shape Up! Adults study were recruited for similar sized stratifications by sex, age (18-40, 40-60, >60 years), BMI (under, normal, overweight, obese), and across five ethnicities (non-Hispanic [NH] Black, NH White, Hispanic, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander). All participants received manual anthropometry assessments, duplicate whole-body 3DO (Styku S100), and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans. 3DO estimates provided by the manufacturer for anthropometry and body composition were compared to the criterion measures using concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and Bland-Altman analysis. Test-retest precision was assessed by root mean square error (RMSE) and coefficient of variation. RESULTS: A total of 188 (102 female) participants were included. The overall fat free mass (FFM) as measured by DXA (54.1 ± 15.2 kg) and 3DO (55.3 ± 15.0 kg) showed a small mean difference of 1.2 ± 3.4 kg (95% limits of agreement -7.0 to +5.6) and the CCC was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96-0.98). The CCC for FM was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.94-0.97) and the mean difference of 1.3 ± 3.4 kg (95% CI: -5.5 to +8.1) reflected the difference in FFM measures. 3DO anthropometry and body composition measurements showed high test-retest precision for whole body volume (1.1 L), fat mass (0.41 kg), percent fat (0.60%), arm and leg volumes, (0.11 and 0.21 L, respectively), and waist and hip circumferences (all <0.60 cm). No group differences were observed when stratified by body mass index, sex, or race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: The anthropometric and body composition estimates provided by the 3DO scanner are precise and accurate to criterion methods if offsets are considered. This method offers a rapid, broadly available, and automated method of body composition assessment regardless of body size. Further studies are recommended to examine the relationship between measurements obtained by 3DO scans and metabolic health in healthy and clinical populations. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Entities:
Keywords:
3-Dimensional optical; Body fat percent; DXA; Digital anthropometry; Fat free mass; Validation
Authors: Thomas N Hangartner; Sarah Warner; Pierre Braillon; Larry Jankowski; John Shepherd Journal: J Clin Densitom Date: 2013 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 2.617
Authors: Asnawi Abdullah; Johannes Stoelwinder; Susan Shortreed; Rory Wolfe; Christopher Stevenson; Helen Walls; Maximilian de Courten; Anna Peeters Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2010-06-29 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Daphne P Guh; Wei Zhang; Nick Bansback; Zubin Amarsi; C Laird Birmingham; Aslam H Anis Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Jordan R Moon; Sarah E Tobkin; Michael D Roberts; Vincent J Dalbo; Chad M Kerksick; Michael G Bemben; Joel T Cramer; Jeffrey R Stout Journal: Nutr Metab (Lond) Date: 2008-03-19 Impact factor: 4.169
Authors: Jonathan P Bennett; Yong En Liu; Brandon K Quon; Nisa N Kelly; Lambert T Leong; Michael C Wong; Samantha F Kennedy; Dominic C Chow; Andrea K Garber; Ethan J Weiss; Steven B Heymsfield; John A Shepherd Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2022-08 Impact factor: 9.298
Authors: Marco Alessandro Minetto; Angelo Pietrobelli; Chiara Busso; Jonathan P Bennett; Andrea Ferraris; John A Shepherd; Steven B Heymsfield Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-05-30