Home > Riviste > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Fascicoli precedenti > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 June;42(2) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 June;42(2):186-9

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti

THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS

Rivista di Medicina, Traumatologia e Psicologia dello Sport


Indexed/Abstracted in: Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,215


eTOC

 

Technical notes  BODY COMPOSITION, SPORT NUTRITION AND SUPPLEMENTATION


The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 June;42(2):186-9

Copyright © 2009 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Bioelectrical impedance measures in different position and vs dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)

Andreoli A., Melchiorri G. *, De Lorenzo A., Caruso I. *, Sinibaldi Salimei P. **, Guerrisi M. ***

From the Human Nutrition Unit University “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy and Don Gnocchi Foundation, Rome, Italy *Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation **General Pathology ***Medical Physics University “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy


PDF  


Background. Bioelectrical impe­dance anal­y­sis (BIA) is a ­safe, low-­cost, non-invasi­ve, rap­id meth­od for the assess­ment of ­body com­po­si­tion. It has there­fore a ­great poten­tial to be ­employed for epi­dem­i­olog­i­cal and clin­i­cal stud­ies. However, ­many devic­es are avail­able to esti­mate total body water (TBW), fat-free mass (FFM) and fat mass (FM) by bio­electri­cal impe­dance meas­ure­ments. Moreover, ­bipedal devic­es allow­ing meas­ure­ments in the ­only stand­ing posi­tion are recent­ly devel­oped. They are ­easy and prac­ti­cal to use with­out oper­a­tor, so a ­large dif­fu­sion can be fore­cast­ed in ­fields as ­sport and ­diet pro­grams. Comparison of ­body com­po­si­tion esti­ma­tion by a ­bipedal ­device ­with bio­im­pe­dance devic­es cur­rent­ly ­used, ­using dual-ener­gy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as ref­er­ence meth­od.
Methods. The ­study was per­formed on 18 ­healthy wom­en vol­un­teers, age 32.0±10.7 ­years divid­ed in two ­groups at dif­fer­ent lev­els of ­body fat­ness. A Xitron 4000 impedance analyser, a BIA-101 RJL System, and the ­bipedal ­device Tanita ­were ­used for com­par­i­son. The meas­ure­ments ­were per­formed in stand­ing and ­supine posi­tion for Xitron and RJL devic­es. DXA meas­ure­ments ­were per­formed ­with a ­total ­body scan­ner DPX, Lunar.
Results. FM and FFM ­were not sta­tis­ti­cal­ly dif­fer­ent ­when meas­ured ­with Xitron and RJL in com­par­i­son ­with DXA, ­while ­these var­i­ables ­were sig­nif­i­cant­ly dif­fer­ent ­between Tanita and DXA meas­ure­ments. No sig­nif­i­cant dif­fer­ence ­were ­found ­between meas­ure­ments in the ­supine and stand­ing posi­tion ­with the Xitron and RJL ­system.
Conclusions. Our ­results sug­gest ­that FM and FFM eval­u­at­ed by ­bipedal ­device Tanita are sig­nif­i­cant­ly dif­fer­ent ­from FM and FFM meas­ured by DXA in ­both nor­mal and ­obese pop­u­la­tion.

inizio pagina

Publication History

Per citare questo articolo

Corresponding author e-mail