Sports Medicine Department, Mayo Clinic Health System, Onalaska, Wisconsin.
Exercise and Sport Science Department, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, La Crosse, Wisconsin.
J Strength Cond Res. 2024 Aug 1;38(8):e448-e453. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004809.
Jagim, AR, Luedke, J, Erickson, JL, Fields, JB, and Jones, MT. Validation of bioelectrical impedance devices for the determination of body fat percentage in firefighters. J Strength Cond Res 38(8): e448-e453, 2024-To cross-validate bioelectrical impedance devices for the determination of body fat percentage (BF%) in firefighters. Twenty-eight structural firefighters were evaluated (female, n = 2; male, n = 26 [mean ± SD] age: 38.2 ± 8.3 years; height: 180.2 ± 7.5 cm; body mass: 86.7 ± 20.8 kg; body mass index: 25.8 ± 7.8 kg·m-2) using multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA) hand-to-foot device, and single-frequency BIA foot scale (F2FBIA), and a single-frequency handheld BIA device (HHBIA). Dual X-ray absorptiometry served as the criterion. Validity metrics were examined to establish each method's performance. Body fat % values produced by MFBIA (r = 0.913), F2FBIA (r = 0.695), and HHBIA (r = 0.876) were strongly associated (p < 0.001) with criterion BF% measures. However, MFBIA, F2FBIA, and HHBIA all significantly (p < 0.001) underestimated BF% when compared with the criterion measure. Constant error ranged between 4.0 and 5.5% across all BIA devices. Despite strong associations between the BIA devices included in the current study and the criterion measure, all BIA devices underestimated BF%, which resulted in an overestimation of fat-free mass. In addition, proportional bias was observed in which BF% was overestimated at lower values and underestimated at higher values.
贾吉姆、卢德克、埃里克森、菲尔兹和琼斯。生物电阻抗设备在消防员体脂百分比测定中的验证。J 力量与调理研究 38(8):e448-e453,2024-交叉验证生物电阻抗设备在消防员体脂百分比(BF%)测定中的应用。对 28 名结构消防员进行了评估(女性,n=2;男性,n=26[平均±SD]年龄:38.2±8.3 岁;身高:180.2±7.5 厘米;体重:86.7±20.8 千克;体重指数:25.8±7.8 千克·米-2)使用多频生物电阻抗分析(MFBIA)手到脚设备和单频 BIA 足秤(F2FBIA),以及单频手持 BIA 设备(HHBIA)。双 X 射线吸收法作为标准。有效性指标被检查以确定每种方法的性能。MFBIA(r=0.913)、F2FBIA(r=0.695)和 HHBIA(r=0.876)产生的体脂%值与标准 BF%测量值密切相关(p<0.001)。然而,与标准测量值相比,MFBIA、F2FBIA 和 HHBIA 均显著(p<0.001)低估了 BF%。所有 BIA 设备的恒误差在 4.0%至 5.5%之间。尽管当前研究中包含的 BIA 设备与标准测量值之间存在很强的关联,但所有 BIA 设备均低估了 BF%,从而高估了去脂体重。此外,还观察到比例偏差,即 BF%在较低值时高估,在较高值时低估。