Andrew R Jagim, Joel Luedke, Jacob L Erickson, Jennifer B Fields, Margaret T Jones
{"title":"Validation of Bioelectrical Impedance Devices for the Determination of Body Fat Percentage in Firefighters.","authors":"Andrew R Jagim, Joel Luedke, Jacob L Erickson, Jennifer B Fields, Margaret T Jones","doi":"10.1519/JSC.0000000000004809","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Jagim, AR, Luedke, J, Erickson, JL, Fields, JB, and Jones, MT. Validation of bioelectrical impedance devices for the determination of body fat percentage in firefighters. J Strength Cond Res 38(8): e448-e453, 2024-To cross-validate bioelectrical impedance devices for the determination of body fat percentage (BF%) in firefighters. Twenty-eight structural firefighters were evaluated (female, n = 2; male, n = 26 [mean ± SD] age: 38.2 ± 8.3 years; height: 180.2 ± 7.5 cm; body mass: 86.7 ± 20.8 kg; body mass index: 25.8 ± 7.8 kg·m-2) using multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA) hand-to-foot device, and single-frequency BIA foot scale (F2FBIA), and a single-frequency handheld BIA device (HHBIA). Dual X-ray absorptiometry served as the criterion. Validity metrics were examined to establish each method's performance. Body fat % values produced by MFBIA (r = 0.913), F2FBIA (r = 0.695), and HHBIA (r = 0.876) were strongly associated (p < 0.001) with criterion BF% measures. However, MFBIA, F2FBIA, and HHBIA all significantly (p < 0.001) underestimated BF% when compared with the criterion measure. Constant error ranged between 4.0 and 5.5% across all BIA devices. Despite strong associations between the BIA devices included in the current study and the criterion measure, all BIA devices underestimated BF%, which resulted in an overestimation of fat-free mass. In addition, proportional bias was observed in which BF% was overestimated at lower values and underestimated at higher values.</p>","PeriodicalId":17129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000004809","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract: Jagim, AR, Luedke, J, Erickson, JL, Fields, JB, and Jones, MT. Validation of bioelectrical impedance devices for the determination of body fat percentage in firefighters. J Strength Cond Res 38(8): e448-e453, 2024-To cross-validate bioelectrical impedance devices for the determination of body fat percentage (BF%) in firefighters. Twenty-eight structural firefighters were evaluated (female, n = 2; male, n = 26 [mean ± SD] age: 38.2 ± 8.3 years; height: 180.2 ± 7.5 cm; body mass: 86.7 ± 20.8 kg; body mass index: 25.8 ± 7.8 kg·m-2) using multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA) hand-to-foot device, and single-frequency BIA foot scale (F2FBIA), and a single-frequency handheld BIA device (HHBIA). Dual X-ray absorptiometry served as the criterion. Validity metrics were examined to establish each method's performance. Body fat % values produced by MFBIA (r = 0.913), F2FBIA (r = 0.695), and HHBIA (r = 0.876) were strongly associated (p < 0.001) with criterion BF% measures. However, MFBIA, F2FBIA, and HHBIA all significantly (p < 0.001) underestimated BF% when compared with the criterion measure. Constant error ranged between 4.0 and 5.5% across all BIA devices. Despite strong associations between the BIA devices included in the current study and the criterion measure, all BIA devices underestimated BF%, which resulted in an overestimation of fat-free mass. In addition, proportional bias was observed in which BF% was overestimated at lower values and underestimated at higher values.
期刊介绍:
The editorial mission of The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (JSCR) is to advance the knowledge about strength and conditioning through research. A unique aspect of this journal is that it includes recommendations for the practical use of research findings. While the journal name identifies strength and conditioning as separate entities, strength is considered a part of conditioning. This journal wishes to promote the publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts which add to our understanding of conditioning and sport through applied exercise science.