Why bioelectrical impedance analysis should be used for estimating adiposity

Houtkooper, Linda; Lohman, Timothy G.; Going, Scott B.; Howell, Wanda H.

doi:10.1093/ajcn/64.3.436s

Cited by 301 publications

(245 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

209

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another study in children with Prader Willi syndrome did find a similar regression coefficient (Davies, 1992). As can be seen from Figure 2 there is a lot of scatter around the line of best fit contributing to a high standard error of estimate Statement, 1994;Houtkooper et al, 1996) than have been observed in foot-to-foot BIA studies which may be of concern. A reason suggested by Nunez (1997) for the large SEE associated with body composition regression models in their studies was because of the diverse nature of the subject pool.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…Limitations associated with BIA technology include the assumption of constant hydration and FFM composition which can vary with obesity, disease, age and in different ethnic groups (Houtkooper et al, 1996). Although oedema was not observed in any of the subjects, some of them were receiving chemotherapy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tetra-polar BIA has been used in many populations and many validations have been undertaken (Lukaski et al, 1986;Segal et al, 1987;Houtkooper et al, 1996). A recent development is foot-to-foot or leg-to-leg BIA.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance analysis for the prediction of total body water in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the accuracy of total body water (TBW) predicted by foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance compared with a deuterium oxide dilution technique in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy. Design: Cross-sectional design. Setting: Two private Australian radiation oncology facilities. Subjects: In all, 27 subjects (23 males; four females); mean age 62 (715) y; mean BMI 26.2 kg/m 2 (73.6). Intervention: TBW was measured using a deuterium oxide dilution technique and predicted using foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance (Tanita Inc., Tokyo, Japan, Models TBF 410 and 300GS). Results: The mean (s.d.) values for predicted and measured TBW was 41.5 (6.7) and 39.7 (8.7) l, respectively, indicating a mean bias to overestimation by the foot-to-foot impedance of 1.8 l. However, a significant negative correlation between the mean of the measurements of TBW and their difference (r ¼ À0.40; P ¼ 0.04) indicates a progressive underestimation of TBW by foot-tofoot impedance as the water content of the body increases. The analysis of 95% limits of agreement (72 s.d.) showed that for most individuals the TBW predicted by foot-to-foot impedance can vary as much as 12 l above or 8.6 l below the actual TBW measured by a deuterium oxide dilution technique. Conclusion: There is good agreement between foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance with a gold standard technique at the group level. However, the significant correlation between the difference of predicted and measured TBW, and the wide limits of agreement between the two methods, indicates that the use of foot-to-foot impedance in assessing TBW may lead to unacceptable error in individuals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance analysis for the prediction of total body water in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although bioelectrical impedance measurements capture body fat more accurately than anthropometric measurements,8, 38 they have limitations. Studies assessing bioelectrical impedance in diverse populations may require population‐specific calibration equations for different ethnic groups 8.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adiposity and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women: Results from the UK Biobank prospective cohort

Guo

Key

Reeves

2018

Intl Journal of Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Body size is an important modifiable risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer. However, it remains unclear whether direct measures of fat mass are better indicators of risk than anthropometric measures, or whether central adiposity may contribute to risk beyond overall adiposity. We analyzed data from 162,691 postmenopausal women in UK Biobank followed from 2006 to 2014. Body size was measured by trained technicians. Multivariable‐adjusted Cox regression was used to estimate relative risks. Analyses were stratified by age at recruitment, region and socioeconomic status, and adjusted for family history of breast cancer, age at menarche, age at first birth, parity, age at menopause, previous hormone replacement therapy use, smoking, alcohol intake, height, physical activity and ethnicity. We observed 2,913 incident invasive breast cancers during a mean 5.7 years of follow‐up. There was a continuous increase in risk of postmenopausal breast cancer with increasing adiposity, across all measures. The point estimate, comparing women in the top (median 37.6 kg) to bottom (median 17.6 kg) quartile of body fat mass was 1.70 (95% confidence interval 1.52–1.90). The magnitudes of the associations between per SD increase in BMI and body fat mass with breast cancer risk were similar, suggesting impedance measures of fat were not substantially better indicators of risk than anthropometric measures. After adjusting for body fat mass, the associations between anthropometric measures of central adiposity and breast cancer risk were attenuated. The magnitude of risk, across all measures of adiposity, was greater in women who had been postmenopausal for 12 or more years.

show abstract

“…These reports were then stored in a protected electronic database with a patient identifier in order to retrospectively collect perioperative complication and outcomes data following surgery. It is important to note that PBF can be calculated through a variety of measures (hydrodensitometry, dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, anthropometric measures); however, body-fat estimation by current BIA has validated correlation against such measures [18][19][20].…”

Section: Obesity Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percent Body Fat More Associated with Perioperative Risks After Total Joint Arthroplasty Than Body Mass Index

Ledford

Thiele

Appleton

et al. 2014

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why bioelectrical impedance analysis should be used for estimating adiposity

Abstract: The whole-body

Cited by 301 publications

References 48 publications

Evaluation of foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance analysis for the prediction of total body water in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy

Evaluation of foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance analysis for the prediction of total body water in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy

Adiposity and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women: Results from the UK Biobank prospective cohort

Percent Body Fat More Associated with Perioperative Risks After Total Joint Arthroplasty Than Body Mass Index

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About