a Department of Exercise Science and Sport Management , Kennesaw State University , Kennesaw , GA , USA.
Eur J Sport Sci. 2018 Jul;18(6):763-771. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2018.1448458. Epub 2018 Mar 15.
The purpose of this study was to compare the body fat per cent (BF%) assessed with a unique handheld electrical impedance myography (EIM) device, along with other popular methods, to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Participants included 33 males (aged 24.3 ± 4.6 years) and 38 females (aged 25.3 ± 8.9 years) who completed 2 visits separated by 24-72 h. The assessments included DXA, bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), skinfold measures (SKF), and three separate EIM measurements. No significant differences in BF% (P > 0.05) were found between all EIM assessments when compared against DXA for both males and females for each visit. All methods showed no significant differences in BF% (P > 0.05) between days within themselves. Across both days, the standard error of the estimate (SEE) for the EIM measurements ranged from 2.66% to 3.15%, the SEE for BIA was 2.80 and 2.85, and for SKF was 2.90 and 2.82. The 95% limits of agreement ranged from ±5.34% to ±6.38% for EIM measurements and were highest for SKF (±7.42% and ±7.47%). The total error for both days was largest for SKF (5.20% and 5.35%) and lowest for the EIM measurements (2.48-3.24%). This investigation supports use of a handheld EIM device as an accurate and reliable method of estimating BF% compared to DXA in young, apparently healthy individuals with BF% in the range of 10-22% for males and 20-32% in females and suggests this EIM device be considered a viable alternative to other established field measurements in this population.
本研究旨在比较一种独特的手持式电阻抗肌动描记术（EIM）设备评估的体脂肪百分比（BF%），以及其他流行的方法，与双能 X 射线吸收法（DXA）相比。参与者包括 33 名男性（年龄 24.3±4.6 岁）和 38 名女性（年龄 25.3±8.9 岁），他们在 24-72 小时内完成了 2 次访问。评估包括 DXA、生物电阻抗分析（BIA）、皮褶测量（SKF）和 3 种单独的 EIM 测量。在每次访问中，所有 EIM 评估与 DXA 相比，男性和女性的 BF%（P>0.05）均无显著差异。所有方法在自身的日内均无 BF%（P>0.05）差异。在两天内，EIM 测量的估计标准误差（SEE）范围为 2.66%至 3.15%，BIA 的 SEE 为 2.80 和 2.85，SKF 的 SEE 为 2.90 和 2.82。EIM 测量的 95%一致性界限范围为±5.34%至±6.38%，而 SKF 的界限最高（±7.42%和±7.47%）。两天的总误差 SKF 最大（5.20%和 5.35%），EIM 测量最低（2.48-3.24%）。本研究支持在 BF%范围为男性 10-22%和女性 20-32%的年轻、健康个体中，使用手持式 EIM 设备作为 DXA 估计 BF%的准确可靠方法，并表明该 EIM 设备可作为该人群中其他既定现场测量的可行替代方法。
