Validity of the Portable Ultrasound BodyMetrix™ BX-2000 for Measuring Body Fat Percentage

Abstract

BodyMetrix™ BX-2000 (IntelaMetrix, Livermore, CA, USA) has been introduced as one of the alternatives and portable methods to estimate body fat percentage. However, inconsistent results between protocols built-in the BodymetrixTM may be compelling the question of its validity. Thus, this study first investigated the possible errors between protocols and evaluated the validity of body fat percentage (BF%) compared to the gold standard method (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, DEXA). One hundred and five collegiate males, aged 20.01 ± 2.11 years, body height, 174.81 ± 6.01 cm, body mass, 73.26 ± 13.60 kg, and body mass index, 23.91 ± 3.77 kg·m−2 participated in the present study. Participants’ body fat percentage was estimated by built-in nine different protocols in the BodyMetrix™ BX-2000 using A-MODE ultrasound. Pearson correlation (r), Mean absolute percentage errors (MAPEs), Bland & Altman plots, and Equivalence testing were used to examine the validity of each protocol by comparing it to the criterion measure (i.e., DEXA). The results indicated good potential for almost all of the protocols in correlation (Min: r = 0.79, Max: r = 0.92)., MAPEs (Min: 20.0%, Max: 33.8%), and Bland-Altman (Min diff: 16.7, Max diff: 41.4). Particularly, the estimated BF% from protocol 7 (4-sites by Durnin & Wormersley) and protocol 9 (9-sites Parllo) were completed within the equivalence zone (±10% of the mean). The estimates measured by protocol 7 and protocol 9 identified as the most valid methods for estimating BF% using a BodyMetrix™ BX-2000, compared to the DEXA. Our findings provide valuable information when applying in young male individuals, but future studies with other populations such as female or adolescents may be required to suggest a valid protocol within the instrument.

Utility of high‐resolution ultrasound in measuring subcutaneous fat thickness

“…2,3,[6][7][8][9] While previous studies have characterized the utilization of ultrasound for the measurement of subcutaneous fat using probe frequencies ranging from 2.5 to 7 MHz, they are limited by their disproportionate representation of participants who are older, identify as White or Asian, and men. [10][11][12][13] The primary objective of our study was to utilize HRUS to measure fat thickness at distinct anatomic sites in men and women of different races and ages. A secondary objective was to correlate these measurements with self-perceptions of body image.…”

Body Fat Composition in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Comparative Study Between Skinfolds and Ultrasonography

“…The assessment of the body fat percentage of patients with IBD is of paramount importance in nutritional management, considering that BMI calculation in isolation has limited utility (18) . This method is universally applicable and should continue to be used.…”

“…When US is compared with the evaluation made by Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA), considered the gold standard measurement method, there are also adequate estimates, as this device is portable, easy to handle and has a lower operating cost (18) . In addition, DXA is an exam that requires a specialized radiologist, is a high-cost procedure which represents a barrier to routine use in public outpatient clinics (33) .…”

Explorando a utilização da ultrassonografia modo A portátil para a avaliação da composição corporal: Uma revisão narrativa

“…Relata-se que em cada local foram feitas de 3 a 5 medidas para obter a espessura média que foi utilizada para calcular a densidade corporal e assim calculando em %GC automaticamente através do software próprio do equipamento. Kang et al (2020) e Lewandowski et al (2022) não apresentaram uma estimativa específica de %GC, focando na medição dos mesmos pontos anatômicos por meio de adipometros e US, respectivamente. Não foram fornecidos detalhes sobre o número de avaliadores envolvidos ou a frequência das medições em cada ponto.…”