Reliability and validity of various laboratory methods of body composition assessment in young adults

Abstract

Summary Accurate measures of body composition (BC) are essential for performance and health. In addition to accuracy, BC measures should be practical and be minimally invasive to maximize their utility. The purpose of the present study was to compare the day‐to‐day variability and validity of four common laboratory‐based body composition assessments to a criterion four‐compartment model. Dual x‐ray absorptiometry (DXA), air displacement plethysmography (BP), multi‐frequency bioelectrical impedance (MF‐BIA) and underwater weighing (UWW) were performed twice in a sample of 32 young men and women. Participants were assessed in a fasted, euhydrated state 2–7 days apart. All methods were compared to a criterion four‐compartment model using BP‐derived body volume, DXA‐derived bone mineral content and MF‐BIA‐derived total body water (4CBP). Additional four‐compartment models using UWW‐ and DXA‐derived body volume were also examined (4CUWW) and (4CDXA). Validity results were conducted with paired t‐tests and Bland–Altman analysis. Reliability was determined using intraclass correlations (ICC), coefficients of variation (CV) and standard error of the measurement (SEM). Validity analysis revealed that all methods overestimated per cent body fat and fat mass, and underestimated fat‐free mass when compared with 4CBP, but only DXA and BP were significantly different (P<0·008). All measures were highly reliable across days (ICCs > 0·9, CVs < 12%). Results of the present study indicate that typical laboratory‐based methods of body composition are valid and reliable. However, we caution that results should not be translated between methods and assessments should be performed with the same instrument when the goal is to monitor changes in body composition over time.

Usefulness of relative fat mass in estimating body adiposity in Korean adult population

“…However, our study is not without limitations. We used DXA as a reference method, but the currently accepted " gold standard " is the fourcompartment model [23]. However, as the DXA scanner (QDR4500A) was the same as that used by Woolcott et al [7], there are no concerns with respect to evaluating the validity of RFM.…”

Changes in body composition with a hypocaloric diet combined with sedentary, moderate and high-intense physical activity: a randomized controlled trial.

“…Body fat percentage (%BF), MM and the percentage of water (%W), were considered as being result variables, and were monitored and recorded throughout the time by multifrequency electrical impedance (BWB-800A, Tanita Corp. USA), previously validated. [34] This method is based on a 3-compartment model capable of evaluating BF, MM and bone mineral content. Also, the percentage difference of each dependent variable collected in the control consultations were recorded and compared to that in the first consultation, to evaluate the changes produced.…”

Effectiveness of PUSH notifications from a mobile app for improving the body composition of overweight or obese women: a protocol of a three-armed randomized controlled trial

“…The percentage of body fat (BF), muscle mass (MM), and the percentage of water (W), considered to be result variables, were monitored and collected throughout the time by previously validated multifrequency bioelectrical impedance (BWB-800A, Tanita Corp. USA) [41]. This method is based on a 3-compartment model capable of evaluating BF, MM, and bone mineral content.…”