Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Validation of InBody 770 bioelectrical impedance analysis compared to a four-compartment model criterion in young adults.
Brewer, Gabrielle J; Blue, Malia N M; Hirsch, Katie R; Saylor, Hannah E; Gould, Lacey M; Nelson, Alyson G; Smith-Ryan, Abbie E.
Afiliação
  • Brewer GJ; Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
  • Blue MNM; Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
  • Hirsch KR; Human Movement Science Curriculum, Department of Allied Health Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
  • Saylor HE; Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
  • Gould LM; Human Movement Science Curriculum, Department of Allied Health Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
  • Nelson AG; Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
  • Smith-Ryan AE; Human Movement Science Curriculum, Department of Allied Health Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging ; 41(4): 317-325, 2021 Jul.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33752260
BACKGROUND: Multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MF-BIA) offers enhanced body composition outcomes in a time-efficient manner. The accuracy of stand-up MF-BIA compared against a four-compartment (4C) criterion lacks evidence. OBJECTIVES: To validate a stand-up MF-BIA compared to a 4C criterion for fat mass (FM), fat-free mass (FFM) and body fat percentage (%fat). SUBJECTS/METHODS: Eighty-two healthy (32% men) normal-weight (BMI: 18.5-24.9 kg/m2 ) young adults were measured for body composition determined from a stand-up MF-BIA and 4C model. Validity statistics included total error (TE) and standard error of the estimate (SEE) to examine prediction error between methods. RESULTS: For the total sample, prediction error was the highest for %fat (TE = 4.2%; SEE = 3.9%) followed by FM (TE = 2.4 kg; SEE = 2.2 kg) and FFM (TE = 2.4 kg; SEE = 2.2 kg). In men, %fat (TE = 2.5%; SEE = 2.2%) and FM (TE = 1.9 kg; SEE = 1.6 kg) were ideal; FFM was similar to FM (TE = 1.9 kg; SEE = 1.6 kg). In women, %fat (TE = 4.7%; SEE = 4.4%) ranged from good to fairly good, and FM was very good to excellent (TE = 2.6 kg; SEE = 2.4 kg); FFM was similar to FM (TE = 2.6 kg; SEE = 2.3 kg). CONCLUSIONS: Stand-up MF-BIA may overestimate %fat and FM, and underestimate FFM compared to a 4C model. FM and FFM estimates from MF-BIA demonstrate good agreement to a 4C model and may be a practical measure of body composition in normal-weight adults. The highest error was seen in %fat for both sexes, with greater error in women.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Composição Corporal Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Composição Corporal Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article