Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

What makes a BIA equation unique? Validity of eight-electrode multifrequency BIA to estimate body composition in a healthy adult population

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 67, pages S14–S21 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background/Objectives:

The validity of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) for body composition analysis is limited by assumptions relating to body shape. Improvement in BIA technology could overcome these limitations and reduce the population specificity of the BIA algorithm.

Subjects/Methods:

BIA equations for the prediction of fat-free mass (FFM), total body water (TBW) and extracellular water (ECW) were generated from data obtained on 124 Caucasians (body mass index 18.5–35 kg/m2) using a four-compartment model and dilution techniques as references. The algorithms were validated in an independent multiethnic population (n=130). The validity of BIA results was compared (i) between ethnic groups and (ii) with results from the four-compartment model and two-compartment methods (air-displacement plethysmography, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and deuterium dilution).

Results:

Indices were developed from segmental R and Xc values to represent the relative contribution of trunk and limbs to total body conductivity. The coefficient of determination for all prediction equations was high (R2: 0.94 for ECW, 0.98 for FFM and 0.98 for TBW) and root mean square error was low (1.9 kg for FFM, 0.8 l for ECW and 1.3 kg for TBW). The bias between BIA results and different reference methods was not statistically different between Afro-American, Hispanic, Asian or Caucasian populations and showed a similar difference (−0.2–0.2 kg FFM) when compared with the bias between different two-compartment reference methods (−0.2–0.3 kg FFM).

Conclusions:

An eight-electrode, segmental multifrequency BIA is a valid tool to estimate body composition in healthy euvolemic adults compared with the validity and precision of other two-compartment reference methods. Population specificity is of minor importance when compared with discrepancies between different reference methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Müller MJ, Bosy-Westphal A, Krawczak M . Genetic studies of common types of obesity: a critique of the current use of phenotypes. Obes Rev 2010; 11: 612–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Walley AJ, Asher JE, Froguel P . The genetic contribution to non-syndromic human obesity. Nat Rev Genet 2009; 10: 431–442.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Buchholz AC, Bartok C, Schoeller DA . The validity of bioelectrical impedance models in clinical populations. Nutr Clin Pract 2004; 19: 433–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baracos V, Caserotti P, Earthman CP, Fields D, Gallagher D, Hall KD et al. Advances in the science and application of body composition measurement. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2012; 36: 96–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dehghan M, Merchant AT . Is bioelectrical impedance accurate for use in large epidemiological studies? Nutr J 2008; 7: 26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Organ LW, Bradham GB, Gore DT, Lozier SL . Segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis: theory and application of a new technique. J Appl Physiol 1994; 77: 98–112.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fuller NJ, Jebb SA, Laskey MA, Coward WA, Elia M . Four-component model for the assessment of body composition in humans: comparison with alternative methods, and evaluation of the density and hydration of fat-free mass. Clin Sci (Lond) 1992; 82: 687–693.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Korth O, Bosy-Westphal A, Zschoche P, Gluer CC, Heller M, Muller MJ . Influence of methods used in body composition analysis on the prediction of resting energy expenditure. Eur J Clin Nutr 2007; 61: 582–589.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Siri W . Body composition from fluid spaces and density: analysis of methods. In: BJaH A (ed) Techniques for Measuring Body Composition. National Academy of Sciences: Washington DC, 1961, pp 223–244.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pace N, Rathbun E . Studies on body composition. III. The body water and chemically combined nitrogen content in relation to fat content. J Biol Chem 1945; 158: 685–691.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kehayias JJ, Ribeiro SM, Skahan A, Itzkowitz L, Dallal G, Rogers G et al. Water homeostasis, frailty and cognitive function in the nursing home. J Nutr Health Aging 2012; 16: 35–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Diouf A, Gartner A, Dossou NI, Sanon DA, Bluck L, Wright A et al. Validity of impedance-based predictions of total body water as measured by 2H dilution in African HIV/AIDS outpatients. Br J Nutr 2009; 101: 1369–1377.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Bland JM, Altman DG . Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307–310.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Aleman-Mateo H, Rush E, Esparza-Romero J, Ferriolli E, Ramirez-Zea M, Bour A et al. Prediction of fat-free mass by bioelectrical impedance analysis in older adults from developing countries: a cross-validation study using the deuterium dilution method. J Nutr Health Aging 2010; 14: 418–426.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Dey DK, Bosaeus I, Lissner L, Steen B . Body composition estimated by bioelectrical impedance in the Swedish elderly. Development of population-based prediction equation and reference values of fat-free mass and body fat for 70- and 75-y olds. Eur J Clin Nutr 2003; 57: 909–916.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Sun SS, Chumlea WC, Heymsfield SB, Lukaski HC, Schoeller D, Friedl K et al. Development of bioelectrical impedance analysis prediction equations for body composition with the use of a multicomponent model for use in epidemiologic surveys. Am J Clin Nutr 2003; 77: 331–340.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Houtkooper LB, Lohman TG, Going SB, Howell WH . Why bioelectrical impedance analysis should be used for estimating adiposity. Am J Clin Nutr 1996; 64 (3 Suppl), 436S–448SS.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Piers LS, Soares MJ, Frandsen SL, O’Dea K . Indirect estimates of body composition are useful for groups but unreliable in individuals. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2000; 24: 1145–1152.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Montagnese C, Williams JE, Haroun D, Siervo M, Fewtrell MS, Wells JC . Is a single bioelectrical impedance equation valid for children of wide ranges of age, pubertal status and nutritional status? Evidence from the 4-component model. Eur J Clin Nutr 2012; e-pub ahead of print 18 January 2012; doi:10.1038/ejcn.2011.213.

  20. Foster KR, Lukaski HC . Whole-body impedance--what does it measure? Am J Clin Nutr 1996; 64 (3 Suppl), 388S–396SS.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Fuller NJ, Elia M . Potential use of bioelectrical impedance of the ‘whole body’ and of body segments for the assessment of body composition: comparison with densitometry and anthropometry. Eur J Clin Nutr 1989; 43: 779–791.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wagner DR, Heyward VH . Measures of body composition in blacks and whites: a comparative review. Am J Clin Nutr 2000; 71: 1392–1402.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Shafer KJ, Siders WA, Johnson LK, Lukaski HC . Validity of segmental multiple-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis to estimate body composition of adults across a range of body mass indexes. Nutrition 2009; 25: 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research funding for this study was provided by seca Gmbh & Co. KG, Hamburg, Germany. The research in New York was also supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grant P30-DK26687. Publication of this article was supported by a grant from seca Gmbh & Co. KG, Hamburg, Germany.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Humanernährung und Lebensmittelkunde, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Liel, Kiel, Germany

    A Bosy-Westphal, B Schautz, W Later & M J Müller

  2. Institut für Ernährungsmedizin, Universität Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany

    A Bosy-Westphal

  3. Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA

    J J Kehayias

  4. Body Composition Unit, New York Obesity Nutrition Research Center, St Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital, New York, NY, USA

    D Gallagher

Authors
  1. A Bosy-Westphal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B Schautz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. W Later
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J J Kehayias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D Gallagher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M J Müller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A Bosy-Westphal.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

ABW and MJM serve as consultants for seca Gmbh & Co. KG, Hamburg, Germany. ABW has also received lecture fees from Medicom, seca and Unilever. DG has received lecture fees from seca. JJK serves as a consultant to Abbott Nutrition, Ohio, USA. JJK has also received grant support from Unilever and seca. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bosy-Westphal, A., Schautz, B., Later, W. et al. What makes a BIA equation unique? Validity of eight-electrode multifrequency BIA to estimate body composition in a healthy adult population. Eur J Clin Nutr 67 (Suppl 1), S14–S21 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2012.160

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2012.160

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links