Comparison of multi- and single-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for assessment of body composition in post-menopausal women: effects of body mass index and accelerometer-determined physical activity
Language English Country Great Britain, England Media print-electronic
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PubMed
25039938
DOI
10.1111/jhn.12257
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Bland-Altman analysis, fat mass, fat-free mass, moderate physical activity, obesity, validity,
- MeSH
- Absorptiometry, Photon * MeSH
- Accelerometry MeSH
- Exercise physiology MeSH
- Electric Impedance * MeSH
- Body Mass Index * MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Obesity physiopathology MeSH
- Postmenopause physiology MeSH
- Sedentary Behavior MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Body Composition * MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
BACKGROUND: Bioelectric impedance analysis (BIA) is commonly used in research to assess body composition. However, studies that validate the accuracy of BIA exclusively in post-menopausal women are lacking. The main purpose of the present study was to evaluate the agreement of multi-frequency (MF)-BIA and single-frequency (SF)-BIA with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the estimation of fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) among post-menopausal women with variation in body mass index (BMI) and physical activity (PA). METHODS: FM and FFM were estimated by BIA and DXA in 146 post-menopausal women with a mean (SD) age of 62.8 (5.2) years. PA was determined by an accelerometer. RESULTS: The mean (SD) difference between MF-BIA and DXA was -1.8 (1.8) kg (P = 0.08) and 1.3 (1.8) kg (P = 0.01) for FM and FFM, respectively. SF-BIA provided a significantly lower estimate of FM [-2.0 (2.2) kg; P = 0.04] and a higher estimate of FFM [1.8 (2.4) kg; P < 0.01] compared to DXA. MF-BIA provided significantly better estimates of FM and FFM with narrower limits of agreement than SF-BIA in obese and insufficiently active subjects. In other BMI and PA groups, both BIA devices showed a similar deviation from DXA. CONCLUSIONS: BIA tends to underestimate FM and overestimate FFM relative to DXA. MF-BIA appears to be a more appropriate method for the assessment of body composition than SF-BIA in post-menopausal woman with BMI >30 kg/m(2) and in those who are insufficiently active.
References provided by Crossref.org
Diagnostic performance of body mass index to identify adiposity in women