Key result
Cardiac rehabilitation is linked to ~1-point lower body fat percentage without changing BMI.
Why the study?
Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a simple, non-invasive method to estimate body composition with prognostic implications, motivating an exploration of changes in anthropometrics and BIA parameters among patients participating in a multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation program.
Does a multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation program improve body composition parameters measured by bioelectrical impedance analysis and handgrip strength in patients undergoing cardiac rehabilitation?
Observational (n=87)
Does a multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation program improve body composition parameters measured by bioelectrical impedance analysis and handgrip strength in patients undergoing cardiac rehabilitation?
Multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation yields favorable reductions in body fat and increases in muscle mass and handgrip strength that are not captured by standard BMI or weight measurements, supporting the routine use of bioelectrical impedance analysis in cardiac rehabilitation.
May support BIA to detect body composition gains missed by BMI in cardiac rehab; leaves open outcome impact.
Introduction Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a simple, non-invasive, and accessible method to estimate body composition, with prognostic implications regarding health and nutritional status. We aimed to explore the changes in anthropometrics and body composition parameters using BIA in patients participating in a multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation (CR) program. Methods Body composition was measured using a multiple-frequency BIA device, at admission (pre-CR) and after completing ≥16 sessions (post-CR). CR included aerobic and resistance exercise as well as nutritional counselling via educational kitchen. BIA parameters were compared between the 2 timepoints in each patient and included: weight, Body mass index (BMI), body fat mass (BFM), percent body fat (PBF), skeletal muscle index (SMI), and fat-free mass (FFM). Handgrip strength (HGS) was measured using a hand-held dynamometer. Results The study included 87 patients (74 men; mean age 64±12 years). Weight (kg) (80.9±15.4 pre-CR vs. 81±14.9 post-CR, p=0.481) and BMI (kg/m2) (27.7±4.8 vs. 27.6±4.6, p=0.490) were not significantly different between timepoints. In contrast, BFM (kg) (24.9±9.6 vs. 24.1±8.7, p=0.003) and PBF (%) (30.2±8.4 vs. 29.3±8, p<0.001) decreased, whereas FFM (kg) (56±10.3 vs. 57±10.4, p<0.001) and SMI (kg/m2) (7.8±1 vs. 7.9±1, p<0.001) increased. FFM gain compared to FFM loss of ≥2kg was observed in 23.1% vs. 7.7% of women, 28.4% vs. 2.7% of men, 28.8% vs. 3% of non-obese and 23.8% vs. 4.8% of obese patients, respectively (Figure). HGS (kg) markedly increased (31.7±13.4 vs. 34.7±13.5, p<0.001) and was correlated post-CR with SMI (r=0.66, p<0.001), FFM (r=0.76, p<0.001) and inversely with PBF (r= -0.41, p<0.001), but not with BMI (r=0.11, p=0.332). Conclusions CR intervention was associated with favorable changes in body composition that were correlated with an increase in HGS. These changes were not reflected by BMI, underscoring the importance of incorporating body composition measures into routine CR assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Halevi et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Cardiovascular disease requiring cardiac rehabilitation (n=87). Multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation (aerobic/resistance exercise and nutritional counselling) vs. Pre-cardiac rehabilitation baseline was evaluated on Changes in anthropometrics and bioelectrical impedance analysis body composition parameters (such as percent body fat and fat-free mass) (p=<0.001). Multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation decreased percent body fat (30.2% to 29.3%, p<0.001) and increased fat-free mass (56 to 57 kg, p<0.001) and handgrip strength without changing BMI.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: