Estimations of body fat by anthropometry or bioelectrical impedance differ from those by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in prefrail community-dwelling older women

Comparison of body composition measures assessed by bioelectrical impedance analysis versus dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the United Kingdom Biobank

BACKGROUND

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) serves as common modalities for body composition assessment. This study was aimed to evaluate the agreement between BIA and DXA measures in UK Biobank.

METHODS

UK Biobank participants with body fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) estimates obtained through BIA (Tanita BC418MA) and DXA concurrently were included. Correlation between BIA and DXA-derived estimates were assessed with Lin's concordance correlation coefficients. Bland-Altman and Passing-Boblok analyses were performed to quantify the difference and agreement between BIA and DXA. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify predictors influencing the differences. Finally, prediction models were developed to calibrate BIA measures against DXA.

RESULTS

The analysis included 34437 participants (female 51.4%, mean age 64.1 years at imaging assessment). BIA and DXA measurements were highly correlated (Lin's concordance correlation coefficient 0.94 for FM and 0.94 for FFM). BIA (Tanita BC418MA) underestimates FM overall by 1.84 kg (23.77 vs. 25.61, p < 0.01), and overestimated FFM overall by 2.56 kg (52.49 vs. 49.93, p < 0.01). The BIA-DXA differences were associated with FM, FFM, BMI and waist circumference. The developed prediction models showed overall good performance in calibrating BIA data.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis exhibited strong correlation between BIA (Tanita BC418MA)- and DXA-derived body composition measures at a population level in UK Biobank. However, the BIA-DXA differences were observed at individual level and associated with individual anthropometric measures. Future studies may explore the use of prediction models to enhance the calibration of BIA measures for more accurate assessments in UK Biobank.

Validity and agreement between dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, anthropometry and bioelectrical impedance in the estimation of fat mass in young adults

Introduction

Assessment of fat mass has historically employed various methods like Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA), and bioelectrical impedance (BIA), and anthropometry with its set of formulas. However, doubts persist regarding their validity and interchangeability to evaluate fat mass. This research aimed to determine the validity of anthropometry, and BIA in estimating fat mass Vs DXA, considering the influence of sex and hydration status.

Methods

A descriptive, cross-sectional study included 265 young adults (161 males and 104 females), assessed through DXA, BIA in a standing position, and anthropometry. A fat mass estimation formula with DXA, a fat mass estimation formula with BIA and 10 fat mass estimation formulas with anthropometry were calculated.

Results

Significant differences were found across DXA, BIA and anthropometry in both kilograms and percentages for the overall sample (p<0.001), and when the covariable sex was included (p<0.001), with no significant effect of hydration status (p=0.332-0.527). Bonferroni-adjusted analyses revealed significant differences from DXA with anthropometry and BIA in most cases for the overall sample (p<0.001), as well as when stratified by sex (p<0.001-0.016). Lin's coefficient indicated poor agreement between most of the formulas and methods both in percentage and kilograms of fat mass (CCC=0.135-0.892). In the Bland-Altman analysis, using the DXA fat mass values as a reference, lack of agreement was found in the general sample (p<0.001-0.007), except for Carter's formula in kilograms (p=0.136) and percentage (p=0.929) and Forsyth for percentage (p=0.365). When separating the sample by sex, lack of agreement was found in males for all methods when compared with both percentage and kilograms calculated by DXA (p<0.001). In the female sample, all methods and formulas showed lack of agreement (p<0.001-0.020), except for Evans's in percentage (p=0.058).

Conclusion

The formulas for fat mass assessment with anthropometry and BIA may not be valid with respect to the values reported with DXA, with the exception of Carter's anthropometry formula for general sample and Evans's anthropometry formula for female sample. BIA could also be an alternative if what is needed is to assess fat mass in women as a group.

Development and validation of new bioelectrical impedance equations to accurately estimate fat mass percentage in a heterogeneous Caucasian population

Fat mass percentage (%FM) is frequently determined by nutritionists and personal trainers with bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices. The aims of the present study were: (1) to develop new regression equations using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as the reference method for estimating %FM in a heterogeneous Caucasian population with a foot-to-hand device (BIA-101) and a hand-to-hand device (BIA-TELELAB) and (2) to compare the new equations with the manufacturers' equations. We hypothesized that the new equations would lead to more accurate estimations compared with DXA. A total of 218 healthy Caucasian participants aged 18 to 65 years were divided into a development group and a validation group. The accuracy of the different equations was assessed by mean differences, coefficient of determination, standard error of the estimate (SEE), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and Bland-Altman plots. The proposed equation for BIA-101 explained 90.0% of the variance in the DXA-derived %FM, with a low random error (SEE = 2.98%), excellent agreement (ICC = 0.94), no fixed bias, and relatively low individual variability (5.86%). For BIA-TELELAB, the proposed equation explained 88.0% of the variance in the DXA-derived %FM, with a low random error (SEE = 3.27%), excellent agreement (ICC = 0.93), no fixed bias, and relatively low individual variability (6.37%). The results obtained for the manufacturers' equations confirm that these equations are not a good option for %FM assessment. As hypothesized, the new regression equations for BIA-101 and BIA-TELELAB devices can accurately estimate %FM in a heterogeneous Caucasian population with a broad age range.