An investigation of the accuracy and reliability of body composition assessed with a handheld electrical impedance myography device

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Deutscher übersetzter Titel:Eine Untersuchung der Genauigkeit und Reliabilität eines Handgeräts zur elektronischen Impedanz-Myographie zur Messung der Körperzusammensetzung
Autor:McLester, Cherilyn N.; Dewitt, Alex D.; Rooks, Rasmus; McLester, John R.
Erschienen in:European journal of sport science
Veröffentlicht:18 (2018), 6, S. 763-771, Lit.
Format: Literatur (SPOLIT)
Publikationstyp: Zeitschriftenartikel
Medienart: Elektronische Ressource (online) Gedruckte Ressource
Sprache:Englisch
ISSN:1746-1391, 1536-7290
DOI:10.1080/17461391.2018.1448458
Schlagworte:
Online Zugang:
Erfassungsnummer:PU201811008605
Quelle:BISp

Abstract des Autors

The purpose of this study was to compare the body fat per cent (BF%) assessed with a unique handheld electrical impedance myography (EIM) device, along with other popular methods, to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Participants included 33 males (aged 24.3 ± 4.6 years) and 38 females (aged 25.3 ± 8.9 years) who completed 2 visits separated by 24–72 h. The assessments included DXA, bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), skinfold measures (SKF), and three separate EIM measurements. No significant differences in BF% (P > 0.05) were found between all EIM assessments when compared against DXA for both males and females for each visit. All methods showed no significant differences in BF% (P > 0.05) between days within themselves. Across both days, the standard error of the estimate (SEE) for the EIM measurements ranged from 2.66% to 3.15%, the SEE for BIA was 2.80 and 2.85, and for SKF was 2.90 and 2.82. The 95% limits of agreement ranged from ±5.34% to ±6.38% for EIM measurements and were highest for SKF (±7.42% and ±7.47%). The total error for both days was largest for SKF (5.20% and 5.35%) and lowest for the EIM measurements (2.48–3.24%). This investigation supports use of a handheld EIM device as an accurate and reliable method of estimating BF% compared to DXA in young, apparently healthy individuals with BF% in the range of 10–22% for males and 20–32% in females and suggests this EIM device be considered a viable alternative to other established field measurements in this population.