TY - JOUR
T1 - Good agreement between bioelectrical impedance and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for estimating changes in body composition during weight loss in overweight young women
AU - Thomson, Rebecca
AU - Brinkworth, Grant D.
AU - Buckley, Jonathan D.
AU - Noakes, Manny
AU - Clifton, Peter M.
N1 - Funding Information:
We gratefully acknowledge Ms. Julia Weaver for assisting in the recruitment and coordination of this study and Xenia Cleanthous, Julianne McKeough and Gemma Williams for assisting in the dietary intervention. This study was supported by a project grant from the National Health and Medical Research Council and Rebecca Thomson was supported by a South Australian Department of Health Research Award.
PY - 2007/12
Y1 - 2007/12
N2 - Aims: To compare estimations of body composition using two different methods of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) with dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for estimating body composition during weight loss in overweight and obese young females. Methods: Twenty-four overweight or obese females (age 29.5±6.1 years, BMI 36.4±4.3 kg/m2) had body composition assessed using single-frequency (Tanita Ultimate Scale™; SF-BIA) and multi-frequency (Impedimed SFB7™; MF-BIA) BIA and DXA before and after a 10-week weight loss intervention. Results: MF-BIA estimates of body composition showed good absolute agreement with DXA, as evidenced by the small biases in the estimation of fat free mass (FFM), fat mass (FM) and percentage body fat (BF%); however, the limits of agreement for each variable were wide (bias ±1.96 standard deviation; FFM -1.6±6.5 kg, FM 1.6±6.5 kg, BF% 1.4±6.3%). SF-BIA exhibited a larger bias with wide limits of agreement (FFM 3.8±9.1 kg, FM -3.8±9.1 kg, BF% -4.37±10.3%). During weight loss the values provided by MF-BIA and SF-BIA were not significantly different from DXA (p≥0.89) due to small bias and the limits of agreement were narrow (MF-BIA: FFM -0.01±3.74 kg, FM 0.01±3.74 kg, BF% 0.22±3.40%; SF-BIA: FFM 0.40±3.92 kg, FM -0.40±3.92 kg, BF% 0.25±3.40%). Conclusion: Compared with DXA, both the MF-BIA and SF-BIA accurately assessed changes in body composition with weight loss but, compared with SF-BIA, MF-BIA provided superior cross-sectional estimates of body composition.
AB - Aims: To compare estimations of body composition using two different methods of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) with dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for estimating body composition during weight loss in overweight and obese young females. Methods: Twenty-four overweight or obese females (age 29.5±6.1 years, BMI 36.4±4.3 kg/m2) had body composition assessed using single-frequency (Tanita Ultimate Scale™; SF-BIA) and multi-frequency (Impedimed SFB7™; MF-BIA) BIA and DXA before and after a 10-week weight loss intervention. Results: MF-BIA estimates of body composition showed good absolute agreement with DXA, as evidenced by the small biases in the estimation of fat free mass (FFM), fat mass (FM) and percentage body fat (BF%); however, the limits of agreement for each variable were wide (bias ±1.96 standard deviation; FFM -1.6±6.5 kg, FM 1.6±6.5 kg, BF% 1.4±6.3%). SF-BIA exhibited a larger bias with wide limits of agreement (FFM 3.8±9.1 kg, FM -3.8±9.1 kg, BF% -4.37±10.3%). During weight loss the values provided by MF-BIA and SF-BIA were not significantly different from DXA (p≥0.89) due to small bias and the limits of agreement were narrow (MF-BIA: FFM -0.01±3.74 kg, FM 0.01±3.74 kg, BF% 0.22±3.40%; SF-BIA: FFM 0.40±3.92 kg, FM -0.40±3.92 kg, BF% 0.25±3.40%). Conclusion: Compared with DXA, both the MF-BIA and SF-BIA accurately assessed changes in body composition with weight loss but, compared with SF-BIA, MF-BIA provided superior cross-sectional estimates of body composition.
KW - Bioelectrical impedance analysis
KW - Body composition
KW - Body fat
KW - Dual X-ray absorptiometry
KW - Weight loss
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/36049005594
U2 - 10.1016/j.clnu.2007.08.003
DO - 10.1016/j.clnu.2007.08.003
M3 - Article
C2 - 17936443
AN - SCOPUS:36049005594
SN - 0261-5614
VL - 26
SP - 771
EP - 777
JO - Clinical Nutrition
JF - Clinical Nutrition
IS - 6
ER -