Use of the leg-to-leg bioelectrical impedance method in assessing body- composition change in obese women

136Citations
Citations of this article
110Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: There is little information on whether bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) accurately predicts changes in body composition associated with energy restriction, exercise, or both. Objective: We had 2 objectives: to determine the validity of the leg-to-leg BIA system in 1) estimating body composition in obese and nonobese women, with a cross- sectional design, and 2) assessing changes in body composition in obese women in response to 12 wk of energy restriction, exercise training, or both. Design: Subjects were 98 moderately obese women (43.2 ± 0.6% body fat, 45.0 ± 1.1 y of age) and 27 nonobese control subjects (24.0 ± 1.5% body fat, 43.5 ± 2.5 y of age). Obese subjects were randomly divided into 1 of 4 groups, with fat-free mass, fat mass, and percentage body fat estimated with BIA and underwater weighing before and after 12 wk of intervention. The 4 groups were diet only (4.19-5.44 MJ/d), exercise only (five, 45-min sessions/wk at 78.5 ± 0.5% of maximum heart rate), both exercise and diet, and control (no diet or exercise). Results: No significant difference was found between underwater weighing and BIA in estimating the fat-free mass of the obese and nonobese women (all subjects combined, r = 0.78, P < 0.001, SEE = 3.7 kg) or in estimating decreases in fat mass during 12 wk of energy restriction, exercise, or both in obese subjects (F([3.85]) = 1.45, P = 0.233). Conclusions: The leg-to-leg BIA system accurately assessed fat- free mass in obese and nonobese women, and changes in fat mass with diet alone or when combined with exercise.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Utter, A. C., Nieman, D. C., Ward, A. N., & Butterworth, D. E. (1999). Use of the leg-to-leg bioelectrical impedance method in assessing body- composition change in obese women. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 69(4), 603–607. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/69.4.603

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free