Home > Journals > Gazzetta Medica Italiana Archivio per le Scienze Mediche > Past Issues > Gazzetta Medica Italiana Archivio per le Scienze Mediche 2015 April;174(4) > Gazzetta Medica Italiana Archivio per le Scienze Mediche 2015 April;174(4):153-61

CURRENT ISSUEGAZZETTA MEDICA ITALIANA ARCHIVIO PER LE SCIENZE MEDICHE

A Journal on Internal Medicine and Pharmacology


Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, EMBASE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES  


Gazzetta Medica Italiana Archivio per le Scienze Mediche 2015 April;174(4):153-61

language: English

Evaluation of a multifrequency impedancemeter by Biphotonic densitometry, measuring independent tissue indices, in supine and standing position. Comparison with skin folds

Moreno M.-V. 1, Ribbe E. 1, Rebeyrol J. 1, Vannicatte A. 2, Krief L. 3

1 Department of research and development, Bioparhom, Le Bourget du Lac, France;
2 University of Technology of Compiegne, Compiègne, France;
3 Center for Advanced Medical Imaging, Compiegne Hospital, Compiègne, France


PDF  REPRINTS


AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of independent tissue indices, obtained by a ZM multifrequency impedancemeter, in standing and supine position, with respect to the gold standard: biphotonic densitometry (DXA). In a second step, the aim is also to compare the contributions of skin folds vs. impedance for clinical and sports routine.
METHODS: As part of the clinical study No. A01373-52-2008, 97 healthy subjects underwent ZM and DXA examinations as well as skin fold measurements.
RESULTS: Note that the values of Fat Mass (FM), Lean Body Mass (LBM) and Bone Mineral Content (BMC) are not significantly different from those given by DXA, whether it be for men or women, for the entire body or the left or right part of the body, and whether in lying or standing position. The average error of impedance compared with DXA was 1.6% in supine position, and 1.8% in standing position, for both men and women. The average repeatability error of the tissue data was 0.53%, against more than 2% for skin folds. In addition, there is a difference of 7.7% in the FM obtained using skin folds between measures done by an experienced operator and an inexperienced one, against 0.042% obtained by ZM.
CONCLUSION: Finally, this approach associated with reliable and independent equations for assessing water volumes, combined with good electronics, can also allow to explore hydration status and metabolic data for clinical and sports routine.

top of page