Validation of multi‐frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis versus dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry to measure body fat percentage in overweight/obese Colombian adults

Abstract

Objectives: To verify the validity of multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (mBCA) for predicting body fat percentage (BF%) in overweight/obese adults using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as the reference method.Methods: Forty-eight adults participated (54% women, mean age 5 41.0 6 7.3 years old). The Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between BIA and BF% assessed by DXA. The concordance between BF% measured by both methods was obtained with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman difference plots.Results: Measures of BF% were estimated as 39.0 (SD 5 6.1) and 38.3 (SD 5 6.5) using DXA and mBCA, respectively. The Pearson's correlation coefficient reflected a strong correlation (r 5.921, P 5 .001). The paired t-test showed a significant mean difference between these methods for obese men BF% of 20.6 [(SD 1.95; 95% CI 5 24.0 to 3.0), P 5.037]. Overall, the bias of the mBCA was 20.6 [(SD 2.2; 95% CI 5 25.0 to 3.7), P 5.041], which indicated that the mBCA method significantly underestimated BF% in comparison to the reference method. Finally, in both genders, Lin's concordance correlation coefficient showed a strong agreement. More specifically the DXA value was qc 5 0.943 (95% CI 5 0.775 to 0.950) and the mBCA value was qc 5 0.948 (95% CI 5 0.778 to 0.978).Conclusions: Our analysis showed a strong agreement between the two methods as reflected in the range of BF%. These results show that mBCA and DXA are comparable methods for measuring body composition with higher body fat percentages. However, due to broad limits of agreement, we can only recommend mBCA for groups of populations.

Cardiopulmonary fitness is strongly associated with body cell mass and fat‐free mass

“…While these methods are sometimes considered more reliable for the measurements of FFM and FM, they have also limitations and make assumptions that are not always correct in all situations. The advantage of BIA is that it provides precise, non‐invasive, and portable analysis when assessing body composition comparable to DXA . Finally, in order to confirm which normalization variable is in fact the most appropriate, the ability of each of these normalization variables to predict certain events needs to be analyzed in further longitudinal studies.…”

“…The advantage of BIA is that it provides precise, non-invasive, and portable analysis when assessing body composition comparable to DXA. 15,35 Finally, in order to confirm which normalization variable is in fact the most appropriate, the ability of each of these normalization variables to predict certain events needs to be analyzed in further longitudinal studies.…”

Detraining effect on overweight/obese women after high‐intensity interval training in hypoxia

“…Body composition was determined by a bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) using a standardized body composition analyzer (Tanita BC 418 MA; Tanita Corp, Tokyo, Japan) and included an estimate of trunk fat percentage (% trunk fat; coefficient variation = 1.1% for body fat) and BMI. BIA scales are practical, safe, and have acceptable accuracy for estimating the percentage of body fat . Also, a calibration comparing outputs with skinfold measurements was performed (<2%; % fat mass measured by BIA: 38.57% [n = 112]; % fat mass measured by skinfold: 37.81% [n = 112]).…”

“…BIA scales are practical, safe, and have acceptable accuracy for estimating the percentage of body fat. 31,32 Also, a calibration comparing outputs with skinfold measurements was performed (<2%; % fat mass measured by BIA: 38.57% [n = 112]; % fat mass measured by skinfold: 37.81% [n = 112]). Subjects, wearing sports clothes without metal objects, maintained a standing position, with feet side-byside on the scale and were barefoot.…”

Correlation of body composition parameters using different methods among Brazilian obese adults

“…BIA is a rapid, practical, minimally invasive and relatively inexpensive instrument used to analyze body composition of individuals based on the electrical conductivity of tissues 12,13 . DXA is often referenced in the literature and is regarded in clinical practice as the 'gold standard' for this kind of assessment; it is a simpler, generally safer and faster technique than other modalities for serial measurements of body composition [14][15][16] . Therefore, the objective of this study was to correlate anthropometric, BIA and DXA parameters among obese Brazilian adults with focus on the comparisson with VAT derived from DXA and in the value of antropometric measurements.…”