Velazquez-Alva Maria Del Consuelo, Irigoyen-Camacho Maria Esther, Huerta-Huerta Raquel, Delgadillo-Velazquez Jaime
Health Care Department. Metropolitan Autonomous University Xochimilco. Mexico City. Mexico..
Nutr Hosp. 2014 May 1;29(5):1038-46. doi: 10.3305/nh.2014.29.5.7254.
Studies of obesity require the estimation of fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM); therefore it is important to validate methods that evaluate these measurements.
We sought to compare two different bioelectrical impedance analysis systems (BIAs) to estimate FM and FFM using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as reference.
We used a cross-sectional design. We evaluated FM and FFM using DXA and two types of BIA equipment: a foot-foot system (FFS) and a hand-foot system (HFS). We conducted paired analysis (paired ttest). We used Bland-Altman plots to assess the relationships between FM and FFMI, limits of agreement were constructed (CL).
A total of 175 female students (22.9 ± 2.2 years old) participated in the study. The paired analysis showed significant differences between the mean value of body fat percentage (BF%) estimated by BIA equipment compared to DXA (FFS = 28.7%, HFS= 34.4% and DXA= 35.3%). The mean difference between the HFS and DXA of BF% was -0.96, ((CL -5.29, 7.20). For the FFS, the mean difference was -6.69, (CL -0.29, -13.09). The paired analysis revealed significant differences between the estimates of FFMI by BIA compared to DXA (FFS =16.29, HFS =14.95, DXA =14.18). The mean difference between HFS and DXA was 0.78, and (CL -2.27, 0.72) whereas the FFS mean difference was -2.11 (CL -3.73 -0.49).
A different magnitude of bias was observed between the BIA equipment arrays. The HFS appears to be more reliable than the FFS used, particularly in obtaining FFMI in young women.
肥胖研究需要对脂肪量(FM)和去脂体重(FFM)进行评估;因此,验证评估这些测量值的方法很重要。
我们试图比较两种不同的生物电阻抗分析系统(BIA),以双能X线吸收法(DXA)作为参考来估计FM和FFM。
我们采用横断面设计。我们使用DXA和两种类型的BIA设备评估FM和FFM:足-足系统(FFS)和手-足系统(HFS)。我们进行配对分析(配对t检验)。我们使用Bland-Altman图评估FM与FFMI之间的关系,并构建一致性界限(CL)。
共有175名女学生(22.9±2.2岁)参与了该研究。配对分析显示,与DXA相比,BIA设备估计的体脂百分比(BF%)平均值之间存在显著差异(FFS = 28.7%,HFS = 34.4%,DXA = 35.3%)。HFS与DXA的BF%平均差异为-0.96,(CL -5.29,7.20)。对于FFS,平均差异为-6.69,(CL -0.29,-13.09)。配对分析显示,与DXA相比,BIA估计的FFMI之间存在显著差异(FFS = 16.29,HFS = 14.95,DXA = 14.18)。HFS与DXA的平均差异为0.78,(CL -2.27,0.72),而FFS的平均差异为-2.11(CL -3.73,-0.49)。
在BIA设备阵列之间观察到不同程度的偏差。HFS似乎比所使用的FFS更可靠,特别是在获取年轻女性的FFMI方面。