A comparison of dual energy X- ray absorptiometry and two bioelectrical impedance analyzers to measure body fat percentage and fat-free mass index in a group of Mexican young women

• Main Authors: Maria del Consuelo Velazquez-Alva, Maria Esther Irigoyen-Camacho, Raquel Huerta-Huerta, Jaime Delgadillo-Velazquez
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Arán Ediciones, S. L. 2014-05-01
• Series: Nutrición Hospitalaria
• Subjects: Composición corporal; Grasa corporal; DXA impedancia bioeléctrica; Validación
• Online Access: http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0212-16112014000500012&lng=en&tlng=en

Introduction: Studies of obesity require the estimation of fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM); therefore it is important to validate methods that evaluate these measurements. Objective: We sought to compare two different bioelectrical impedance analysis systems (BIAs) to estimate FM and FFM using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as reference. Methods: We used a cross-sectional design. We evaluated FM and FFM using DXA and two types of BIA equipment: a foot-foot system (FFS) and a hand-footsystem (HFS). We conducted paired analysis (paired t-test). We used Bland-Altman plots to assess the relationships between FM and FFMI, limits of agreement were constructed (CL). Results: A total of 175 female students (22.9 ± 2.2 years-old) participated in the study. The paired analysis showed significant differences between the mean value of body fat percentage (BF%) estimated by BIA equipment compared to DXA (FFS = 28.7%, HFS= 34.4% and DXA= 35.3%). The mean difference between the HFS and DXA of BF% was -0.96, ((CL -5.29, 7.20). For the FFS, the mean difference was -6.69, (CL -0.29, -13.09). The paired analysis revealed significant differences between the estimates of FFMI by BIA compared to DXA (FFS =16.29, HFS =14.95, DXA =14.18). The mean difference between HFS and DXA was 0.78, and (CL -2.27, 0.72) whereas the FFS mean difference was -2.11 (CL -3.73 -0.49). Conclusion: A different magnitude of bias was observed between the BIA equipment arrays. The HFS appears to be more reliable than the FFS used, particularly in obtaining FFMI in young women.