Comparison of bioimpedance body composition in young adults in the Russian Children's Study
Comparison of bioimpedance body composition in young adults in the Russian Children's Study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.clnesp.2019.10.007
复制
发表时间：
2020-02-01
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Sergeyev, Oleg
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rudnev, Sergey;Burns, Jane S.;Sergeyev, Oleg
背景和目标：身体质量指数是一种简单的人体测量方法（kg/m2），用于间接估计个体的身体脂肪，并用于评估人群健康和人群之间的比较。生物电阻抗分析（BIA）通常用于提供有关体脂和去脂质量的额外信息，并已用于在国家健康调查中生成身体成分参考数据。然而，已知BIA测量是特定于设备的，并且很少有已发表的研究比较不同BIA仪器的结果。因此，我们在俄罗斯儿童研究（RCS）中比较了两种BIA仪器在男性生长、青春期发育和成熟方面的性能。Tokyo，Japan）和ABC-01“Medas”（Medas Ltd，莫斯科，俄罗斯）BIA仪器。236名18-22岁RCS受试者的横截面数据用于BIA比较和开发测量电阻之间的转换公式;随访数据（n = 96）用于验证转换公式。全身抵抗力高度相关（斯皮尔曼rho = 0.95），但Medas的脂肪量（FM）估计值显著高于Tanita器械（中位差异3.3 kg，95% CI：2.9，3.6 kg），FM差异的一致性限（LoA）较大（-2.0，8.6 kg）。获得电阻（Res）之间的转换公式：Medas Res = 0.882 x Tanita Res垂直条26.2（r（2）= 0.91，SEE = 17.6 Ohm）。将转换公式应用于Tanita数据并应用Medas评估算法后，“转换后”的Tanita FM估计值与Medas原始估计值非常匹配（中位差异-0.1 kg，95% CI：-0.3，0.2 kg），FM差异的LoA相对较小（-2.3至2.1 kg），表明ABC-01“Medas”和Tanita BC-418 MA数据在组水平上具有潜在的可比性。我们的研究结果支持交叉校准的BIA仪器的人口比较和适当的数据解释在临床和流行病学研究的重要性。(c)2019年欧洲临床营养与代谢学会。由爱思唯尔有限公司出版。保留所有权利。
Background & aims: Body mass index is a simple anthropometric measure (kg/m(2)) used as an indirect estimate of body fat in individuals, and in assessments of population health and comparisons between populations. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is often used to provide additional information on body fat and fat-free mass, and has been used to generate body composition reference data in national health surveys. However, BIA measurements are known to be device-specific and there are few published studies comparing results from different BIA instruments. Therefore, we compared the performance of two BIA instruments in the Russian Children's Study (RCS) of male growth, pubertal development and maturation.Methods: Paired BIA measurements were obtained using the Tanita BC-418MA (Tanita Corp., Tokyo, Japan) and ABC-01 'Medas' (Medas Ltd, Moscow, Russia) BIA instruments. Cross-sectional data on 236 RCS subjects aged 18-22 years were used for the BIA comparison and the development of a conversion formula between measured resistances; follow-up data (n = 96) were used for validation of the conversion formula.Results: Whole-body resistances were highly correlated (Spearman rho = 0.95), but fat mass (FM) estimates were significantly higher with the Medas than the Tanita device (median difference 3.3 kg, 95% CI: 2.9, 3.6 kg) with large limits of agreement (LoA) for the FM difference (-2.0, 8.6 kg). A conversion formula between the resistances (Res) was obtained: Medas Res = 0.882 x Tanita Res vertical bar 26.2 (r(2) = 0.91, SEE = 17.6 Ohm). After applying the conversion formula to Tanita data and application of the Medas assessment algorithm, the 'converted' Tanita FM estimates closely matched the Medas original estimates (median difference -0.1 kg, 95% CI: -0.3, 0.2 kg), with relatively small LoA for the FM difference (-2.3 to 2.1 kg), suggesting potential interchangeability of the ABC-01 'Medas' and Tanita BC-418MA data at the group level.Conclusions: Our results support the importance of cross-calibration of BIA instruments for population comparisons and proper data interpretation in clinical and epidemiological studies. (c) 2019 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.