Testing Bioimpedance to Estimate Body Fat Percentage across Different Hip and Waist Circumferences

Abstract

Many studies have validated the use of bioimpedance analysis (BIA) to quantify body fat percentage (BF%). However, it is unknown if some model types (i.e., hand to hand, foot to foot, and hand to foot) are differing in their validity depending on hip and waist circumferences. The purpose of this study was to compare the difference in BF% between three BIA models (i.e., hand to hand, foot to foot, and hand to foot) against the Bod Pod across different hip and waist circumferences. A total of 92 people aged 19-72 years were recruited in this study. After following the pretesting procedures recommended for BIA measures, BF% was estimated using three BIA models and the Bod Pod. Hip and waist circumferences were obtained using standard procedures and tertiles were computed. The Bland-Altman was plotted and 1-sample T-test as well as correlation between the average measure and the difference between the two measures was tested. Within the entire sample, across all BIA models, the Bland-Altman analysis showed significant difference compared to 0 and a significant difference for the proportional. However, when stratified by tertiles, the two measurements were only significant for the highest tertiles of hip and waist for all BIA apparatus (all p <0.01) and the proportional bias was nonsignificant for all tertiles and across all BIA apparatus. For the highest tertile of waist and hip, the average difference was between 1.67% and 3.29% compared with the Bod Pod estimation. In conclusion, the three BIA models offer a BF% measurement agreeing with the estimation obtained with the Bod Pod with the exception of people having a greater waist or greater hip.

Fat and fat‐free mass measurement agreement by dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry versus bioelectrical impedance analysis: Effects of posture and waist circumference

“…Long et al. compared three types of BIA devices (hand‐to‐hand, hand‐to‐foot, foot‐to‐foot electrodes) to a Bod Pod and found that BIA estimates of BF were lower compared to BodPod only among participants in the highest tertile for WC (104.6 ± 8.7 cm) 43 …”

“…These findings are substantiated by another study that also investigated the effects of a high WC on BIA estimates. Long et al compared three types of BIA devices (hand-to-hand, hand-to-foot, foot-to-foot electrodes) to a Bod Pod and found that BIA estimates of BF were lower compared to BodPod only among participants in the highest tertile for WC (104.6 � 8.7 cm) 43. Weight loss and the resulting reduction in WC would be ex-pected to reduce the abdomen to thigh contact and improve the accuracy of body composition estimates in the seated position.…”

Differences in heart rate variability and body composition in breast cancer survivors and women without cancer

“…Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a non-invasive, low-cost, helpful, and validated tool for estimating body composition 48 . The analysis is achieved by measuring the bioimpedance of an electrical current transmitted to the body through electrodes placed on the feet 49 . On the day of the study, a body composition analyzer, which employed BIA, was used to estimate body composition (BC-533 InnerScan Body Composition Monitor ® , Tanita Corp., Itabashi-Ku Tokyo, Japan).…”

Differences in Heart Rate Variability and Body Composition in Breast Cancer Survivors and Women Without Cancer

“…Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a non-invasive, low-cost, useful, and validated tool for estimating body composition 33 . The analysis is achieved by measuring the bioimpedance of an electrical current transmitted to the body through electrodes placed on the feet 34 . On the day of the study, a body composition analyzer, which employed BIA, was used to estimate body composition (BC-533 InnerScan Body Composition Monitor®, Tanita Corp., Itabashi-Ku Tokyo, Japan).…”