Wang Z H, Dong Y H, Yang Y D, Wang S, Ma J
School of Public Health & Institute of Child and Adolescent Health, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China.
Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2017 Mar 6;51(3):215-219. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-9624.2017.03.005.
To investigate consistency of whole-body muscle mass (WBMM) assessed using multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MF-BIA) and dual energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) measurement, and to delvelop the correction regression formulas for the method of MF-BIA. 1 488 participants who resided in Beijing longer than one year, under 22 to 55 years of age, with self-report BMI ≥24 kg/m(2) were voluntarily recruited based on convenience sampling in Beijing, from April 1(st) 2014 to May 2(nd) 2014. After excluded 171 participants who BMI ≤24 kg/m(2) or with organic diseases when physical examination, Finally 1 317 overweight/obese participants were enrolled into the current study. All the subjects received the measurement of WBMM using both MF-BIA and DXA methods. The paired-samples T test was used to compare the difference of measurement values between MF-BIA and DXA methods. We evaluated the agreement of WBMM measured by MF-BIA and DXA using the interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and the Bland-Altman plots, and using linear regression method established correction regression formulas. The differences of overweight male, obese male, overweight female, and obese female were (3.29 ± 1.94), (2.05 ± 2.65), (0.17 ± 1.85), and (-2.22 ± 2.89) kg between methods of MF-BIA and DXA, respectively; Except the overweight female, the others groups had the statistically significant difference (0.05). The ICC for overweight male, obese male, overweight female, and obese female were 0.958, 0.956, 0.911, and 0.851, respectively (0.001). Bland-Altman plots showed that the limit of agreement for four groups were -0.51-7.09, -3.14-7.24, -3.46-3.80, and -7.88-3.44 kg, respectively. Correction regression formulas: overweight male population: (DXA)=-0.648+ 0.952 (MF-BIA); obese male population: (DXA)=-3.646 + 1.026(MF-BIA); overweight female groups: (DXA)=-4.800 + 1.117 (MF-BIA); obese female group: (DXA)=-9.884+ 1.287(MF-BIA). The correlation and agreement of WBMM measured by the methods of BIA and DXA were relative weak in Chinese excess weight male and obese female adults. Therefore, measuring WBMM by MF-BIA method in these adults should be corrected to reduce bias compared with the DXA method.
为研究使用多频生物电阻抗分析（MF-BIA）和双能X线吸收法（DXA）测量评估的全身肌肉量（WBMM）的一致性，并建立MF-BIA法的校正回归公式。2014年4月1日至2014年5月2日，在北京采用方便抽样法，自愿招募了1488名在北京居住超过1年、年龄在22至55岁之间、自我报告BMI≥24kg/m²的参与者。在排除171名BMI≤24kg/m²或体检时有器质性疾病的参与者后，最终1317名超重/肥胖参与者被纳入本研究。所有受试者均接受了MF-BIA和DXA两种方法的WBMM测量。采用配对样本T检验比较MF-BIA和DXA两种方法测量值的差异。我们使用组内相关系数（ICC）和Bland-Altman图评估MF-BIA和DXA测量的WBMM的一致性，并使用线性回归方法建立校正回归公式。MF-BIA和DXA两种方法测量的超重男性、肥胖男性、超重女性和肥胖女性的差异分别为（3.29±1.94）、（2.05±2.65）、（0.17±1.85）和（-2.22±2.89）kg；除超重女性外，其他组差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。超重男性、肥胖男性、超重女性和肥胖女性的ICC分别为0.958、0.956、0.911和0.851（P<0.001）。Bland-Altman图显示，四组的一致性界限分别为-0.51至7.09、-3.14至7.24、-3.46至3.80和-7.88至3.44kg。校正回归公式：超重男性人群：（DXA）=-0.648 + 0.952（MF-BIA）；肥胖男性人群：（DXA）=-3.646 + 1.026（MF-BIA）；超重女性组：（DXA）=-4.800 + 1.117（MF-BIA）；肥胖女性组：（DXA）=-9.884 + 1.287（MF-BIA）。在中国超重男性和肥胖女性成年人中，BIA和DXA两种方法测量的WBMM的相关性和一致性相对较弱。因此，在这些成年人中使用MF-BIA法测量WBMM时，与DXA法相比应进行校正以减少偏差。
