Comparison of Circumference Body Composition Measurements and Eight-Point Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis to Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry to Measure Body Fat Percentage

BACKGROUND: To compare the circumference measurement (CM) body composition method and 8-point segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis (DSM-BIA) to dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) in military members. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare three body composition methods. Our hypothesis was the CM is as accurate as DSM-BIA and DEXA in assessing body fat percentage (%BF). DESIGN: Cross sectional, observational study. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: ), outpatient clinic setting was used. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Agreement between DEXA and the other two methods was examined using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) using the two-way random method with absolute agreement. Repeated measures analysis of covariance was used to examine the effect of gender and waist circumference on differences in %BF. RESULTS: The agreement of DSM-BIA with DEXA for females was ICC = 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87-0.96) and for males, ICC = 0.89 (95% CI: 0.78-0.94). For the agreement of CM with DEXA, the ICC for females was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.71-0.91) and for males the ICC = 0.72 (95% CI: 0.49-0.85). For females with smaller waists (<81.3 cm), the DSM-BIA underestimated the DEXA measurement by a mean of 1.6% (95% CI: 0.5-2.6%). For males with larger waists (≥95.3 cm), the DSM-BIA overestimated the DEXA measurement by a mean of 2.6% (95% CI: 0.9-4.3%). For females with larger waists (≥81.3 cm), the CM overestimated the DEXA %BF by an average of 2.4% (95% CI: 0.7-4.1%). CONCLUSION: There was good agreement between the three methods assessed in this study. Both waist circumference and gender had an effect on the accuracy of the DSM-BIA and CM measurements.