Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Human Movement Science Curriculum, Department of Allied Health Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2021 Jul;41(4):317-325. doi: 10.1111/cpf.12700. Epub 2021 Apr 1.
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.
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/m ) 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.
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).
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.
多频生物电阻抗分析(MF-BIA)以高效的方式提供更精确的身体成分结果。与四室(4C)标准相比,站立式 MF-BIA 的准确性缺乏证据。
验证站立式 MF-BIA 与 4C 标准相比在脂肪量(FM)、去脂体重(FFM)和体脂肪百分比(%fat)方面的准确性。
受试者/方法:82 名健康(32%为男性)正常体重(BMI:18.5-24.9 kg/m )的年轻成年人进行了身体成分测量,使用站立式 MF-BIA 和 4C 模型进行测量。有效性统计数据包括总误差(TE)和估计标准误差(SEE),以检查两种方法之间的预测误差。
对于整个样本,%fat 的预测误差最高(TE = 4.2%;SEE = 3.9%),其次是 FM(TE = 2.4 kg;SEE = 2.2 kg)和 FFM(TE = 2.4 kg;SEE = 2.2 kg)。在男性中,%fat(TE = 2.5%;SEE = 2.2%)和 FM(TE = 1.9 kg;SEE = 1.6 kg)是理想的;FFM 与 FM 相似(TE = 1.9 kg;SEE = 1.6 kg)。在女性中,%fat(TE = 4.7%;SEE = 4.4%)为良好到相当好,FM 为极好到优秀(TE = 2.6 kg;SEE = 2.4 kg);FFM 与 FM 相似(TE = 2.6 kg;SEE = 2.3 kg)。
与 4C 模型相比,站立式 MF-BIA 可能会高估%fat 和 FM,低估 FFM。MF-BIA 得出的 FM 和 FFM 估计值与 4C 模型具有良好的一致性,可能是正常体重成年人身体成分的实用测量方法。男女的%fat 误差最高,女性的误差更大。