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.

  • Article
  • Published:

Body composition, energy expenditure and physical activity

Cross-sectional and longitudinal agreement between two multifrequency bioimpedance devices for resistance, reactance, and phase angle values

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 74, pages 900–911 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background

The use of raw bioelectrical variables, such as resistance (R), reactance (Xc), and phase angle (φ), has been advocated for evaluating physiological changes.

Methods

Before and after 8 weeks of resistance training, adult females were assessed via multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA; Seca® mBCA 515/514) and bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS; ImpediMed® SFB7). Data were analyzed to determine whether cross-sectional estimates and changes (i.e., Δ scores) of R, Xc, and φ differed between devices at 16 shared measurement frequencies ranging from 3 to 1000 kHz.

Results

Cross-sectionally, strong correlations (r ≥ 0.96) were observed for R across all frequencies, although MFBIA produced values 9–14% greater than BIS. Strong correlations (r ≥ 0.92) for Xc and φ were observed up to frequencies of ~150 kHz. BIS produced greater Xc and φ values at lower frequencies, while MFBIA produced greater values at higher frequencies. In general, proportional bias was not observed, with the exception of Xc at high frequencies and φ at low frequencies. ΔR did not differ between devices at any frequency and was correlated at all frequencies. ΔXc and Δφ did not differ at any frequency and were correlated between devices for frequencies up to ~300 kHz. Proportional bias was generally not observed longitudinally. While individual-level errors were potentially acceptable cross-sectionally, they were concerningly high longitudinally.

Conclusion

Despite notable differences in the characteristics of the bioimpedance devices and cross-sectional disagreement, strong group-level agreement for detecting changes in R, Xc, and φ was generally observed. However, large errors were observed at the individual level.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kyle UG, Bosaeus I, De Lorenzo AD, Deurenberg P, Elia M, Gómez JM, et al. Bioelectrical impedance analysis—part I: review of principles and methods. Clin Nutr. 2004;23:1226–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2004.06.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ward LC. Bioelectrical impedance analysis for body composition assessment: reflections on accuracy, clinical utility, and standardisation. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-018-0335-3.

  3. Lukaski HC. Evolution of bioimpedance: a circuitous journey from estimation of physiological function to assessment of body composition and a return to clinical research. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013; 67: S2-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2012.149.

  4. Scheltinga MR, Jacobs DO, Kimbrough TD, Wilmore DW. Alterations in body fluid content can be detected by bioelectrical impedance analysis. J Surg Res. 1991;50:461–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gibson AL, Beam JR, Alencar MK, Zuhl MN, Mermier CM. Time course of supine and standing shifts in total body, intracellular and extracellular water for a sample of healthy adults. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2015;69:14–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2013.269.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Scharfetter H, Monif M, Laszlo Z, Lambauer T, Hutten H, Hinghofer-Szalkay H. Effect of postural changes on the reliability of volume estimations from bioimpedance spectroscopy data. Kidney Int. 1997;51:1078–87.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Esco MR, Fedewa MV, Freeborn TJ, Moon JR, Wingo JE, Cicone Z et al. Agreement between supine and standing bioimpedance spectroscopy devices and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for body composition determination. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpf.12585.

  8. Garlini LM, Alves FD, Ceretta LB, Perry IS, Souza GC, Clausell NO. Phase angle and mortality: a systematic review. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-018-0159-1.

  9. Norman K, Stobaus N, Pirlich M, Bosy-Westphal A. Bioelectrical phase angle and impedance vector analysis–clinical relevance and applicability of impedance parameters. Clin Nutr. 2012;31:854–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2012.05.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bosy-Westphal A, Danielzik S, Dorhofer RP, Later W, Wiese S, Muller MJ. Phase angle from bioelectrical impedance analysis: population reference values by age, sex, and body mass index. JPEN J Parent Enter Nutr. 2006;30:309–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148607106030004309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Barbosa-Silva MC, Barros AJ, Wang J, Heymsfield SB, Pierson RN Jr. Bioelectrical impedance analysis: population reference values for phase angle by age and sex. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005;82:49–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn.82.1.49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tinsley GM, Moore ML, Graybeal AJ, Paoli A, Kim Y, Gonzales JU et al. Time-restricted feeding plus resistance training in active females: a randomized trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqz126.

  13. ImpediMed. BioImp body composition analysis software for the imp SFB7. LBL-118 Rev B. ImpediMed; 2016.

  14. ImpediMed. Imp SFB7 instructions for use. ImpediMed; 2016.

  15. Bosy-Westphal A, Schautz B, Later W, Kehayias JJ, Gallagher D, Muller MJ. 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. 2013;67:S14–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2012.160.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Seca gmbh & co. Seca 515/514 Product Manual v. 1.1, 2016.

  17. Jäger R, Kerksick CM, Campbell BI, Cribb PJ, Wells SD, Skwiat TM, et al. International society of sports nutrition position stand: protein and exercise. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017;14:20 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-017-0177-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Piccoli A, Pastori G, Codognotto M, Paoli A. Equivalence of information from single frequency v. bioimpedance spectroscopy in bodybuilders. Br J Nutr. 2007;97:182–92. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114507243077.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nescolarde L, Lukaski H, De Lorenzo A, de-Mateo-Silleras B, Redondo-del-Río MP, Camina-Martín MA. Different displacement of bioimpedance vector due to Ag/AgCl electrode effect. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016;70:1401 https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2016.121.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kyle UG, Genton L, Slosman DO, Pichard C. Fat-free and fat mass percentiles in 5225 healthy subjects aged 15 to 98 years. Nutrition. 2001;17:534–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Piccoli A, Pillon L, Dumler F. Impedance vector distribution by sex, race, body mass index, and age in the United States: standard reference intervals as bivariate Z scores. Nutrition. 2002;18:153–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-9007(01)00665-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Silva AM, Matias CN, Nunes CL, Santos DA, Marini E, Lukaski HC et al. Lack of agreement of in vivo raw bioimpedance measurements obtained from two single and multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance devices. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-018-0355-z.

  24. Ribeiro AS, Avelar A, Dos Santos L, Silva AM, Gobbo LA, Schoenfeld BJ, et al. Hypertrophy-type resistance training improves phase angle in young adult men and women. Int J Sports Med. 2017;38:35–40. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-102788.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sardinha LB. Physiology of exercise and phase angle: another look at BIA. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018;72:1323–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-018-0215-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Micheli ML, Pagani L, Marella M, Gulisano M, Piccoli A, Angelini F, et al. Bioimpedance and impedance vector patterns as predictors of league level in male soccer players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014;9:532–9. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2013-0119.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hui D, Bansal S, Morgado M, Dev R, Chisholm G, Bruera E. Phase angle for prognostication of survival in patients with advanced cancer: preliminary findings. Cancer. 2014;120:2207–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28624.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Ribeiro AS, Nascimento MA, Schoenfeld BJ, Nunes JP, Aguiar AF, Cavalcante EF, et al. Effects of single set resistance training with different frequencies on a cellular health indicator in older women. J Aging Phys Act. 2018;26:537–43. https://doi.org/10.1123/japa.2017-0258.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tomeleri CM, Ribeiro AS, Cavaglieri CR, Deminice R, Schoenfeld BJ, Schiavoni D, et al. Correlations between resistance training-induced changes on phase angle and biochemical markers in older women. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2018;28:2173–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.13232.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cunha PM, Tomeleri CM, Nascimento MAd, Nunes JP, Antunes M, Nabuco HC, et al. Improvement of cellular health indicators and muscle quality in older women with different resistance training volumes. J Sports Sci. 2018;36:2843–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Dos Santos L, Cyrino ES, Antunes M, Santos DA, Sardinha LB. Changes in phase angle and body composition induced by resistance training in older women. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016;70:1408–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2016.124.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Nunes JP, Ribeiro AS, Silva AM, Schoenfeld BJ, Dos Santos L, Cunha PM et al. Improvements in phase angle are related with muscle quality index after resistance training in older women. J Aging Phys Activity. 2019; 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1123/japa.2018-0259.

  33. Ribeiro AS, Schoenfeld BJ, Dos Santos L, Nunes JP, Tomeleri CM, Cunha PM et al. Resistance training improves a cellular health parameter in obese older women: a randomized controlled trial. J Strength Cond Res. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000002773.

  34. Ribeiro AS, Schoenfeld BJ, Souza MF, Tomeleri CM, Silva AM, Teixeira DC, et al. Resistance training prescription with different load-management methods improves phase angle in older women. Eur J Sport Sci. 2017;17:913–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Austin Graybeal, Jacob Dellinger, and Robert Smith for their contributions to this project.

Funding

The original project yielding the data used in this analysis was financially supported by Texas Tech University and MTI Biotech Inc. In-kind donations to support the original data collection were received from Dymatize Enterprises and MTI Biotech Inc. These entities did not play a role in the overall design or execution of the study, the analysis and interpretation of the data, or the presentation of the results found in this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Kinesiology & Sport Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA

    Grant M. Tinsley & M. Lane Moore

  2. Exercise and Health Laboratory, CIPER, Faculdade Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Analiza M. Silva & Luis B. Sardinha

Authors
  1. Grant M. Tinsley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Lane Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Analiza M. Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luis B. Sardinha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

GMT designed the research, aided in data collection, performed the analysis, interpreted the results, and drafted the manuscript. MLM collected and processed data, interpreted the results, and revised the manuscript. AMS and LBS interpreted the results and revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grant M. Tinsley.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tinsley, G.M., Moore, M.L., Silva, A.M. et al. Cross-sectional and longitudinal agreement between two multifrequency bioimpedance devices for resistance, reactance, and phase angle values. Eur J Clin Nutr 74, 900–911 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-019-0496-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-019-0496-8

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links