Published in

Springer Nature [academic journals on nature.com], European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2023

DOI: 10.1038/s41430-023-01317-4

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Prediction of fat-free mass in young children using bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Background Bioimpedance devices are practical for measuring body composition in preschool children, but their application is limited by the lack of validated equations. Objectives To develop and validate fat-free mass (FFM) bioimpedance prediction equations among New Zealand 3.5-year olds, with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as the reference method. Methods Bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy (SFB7, ImpediMed) and DXA (iDXA, GE Lunar) measurements were conducted on 65 children. An equation incorporating weight, sex, ethnicity, and impedance was developed and validated. Performance was compared with published equations and mixture theory prediction. Results The equation developed in ~70% (n = 45) of the population (FFM [kg] = 1.39 + 0.30 weight [kg] + 0.39 length2/resistance at 50 kHz [cm2/Ω] + 0.30 sex [M = 1/F = 0] + 0.28 ethnicity [1 = Asian/0 = non-Asian]) explained 88% of the variance in FFM and predicted FFM with a root mean squared error of 0.39 kg (3.4% of mean FFM). When internally validated (n = 20), bias was small (40 g, 0.3% of mean FFM), with limits of agreement (LOA) ±7.6% of mean FFM (95% LOA: –0.82, 0.90 kg). Published equations evaluated had similar LOA, but with marked bias (>12.5% of mean FFM) when validated in our cohort, likely due to DXA differences. Of mixture theory methods assessed, the SFB7 inbuilt equation with personalized body geometry values performed best. However, bias and LOA were larger than with the empirical equations (–0.43 kg [95% LOA: –1.65, 0.79], p < 0.001). Conclusions We developed and validated a bioimpedance equation that can accurately predict FFM. Further external validation of the equation is required.