Body composition, energy expenditure and physical activity

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

Article metrics

  • 50 Accesses

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.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 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.

  2. 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. 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. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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. 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. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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. 13.

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

  14. 14.

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

  15. 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.

  16. 16.

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

  17. 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.

  18. 18.

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

  19. 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.

  20. 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.

  21. 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.

  22. 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.

  23. 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. 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.

  25. 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.

  26. 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.

  27. 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.

  28. 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.

  29. 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.

  30. 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.

  31. 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.

  32. 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. 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. 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.

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

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.

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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark