Validity of whole and regional body composition testing devices
MetadataShow full item record
Obesity has increased exponentially within the last three decades and is now widely recognized as one of today's leading health threats due to it being a risk factor for diseases such as type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and hypertension. In recent years, there have been advances in technology such as bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), and air displacement plethysmography that has been used to categorize individuals into percent fat categories. However, there are still concerns with the validity of these devices. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the validity of the InBody 520, BodPod, and Hologic DEXA against hydrostatic weighing. METHODS: 32 male and 30 female subjects performed body composition testing using the InBody 520, BodPod, Hologic DEXA, and hydrostatic weighing. RESULTS: The constant error values and mean values for percent body fat were the highest amongst the DEXA compared to the InBody and BodPod. The InBody showed a non-significant relationship (p=0.11, p= 0.47, and p=0.26) between constant error values and percent body fat values for hydrostatic weighing for females, males, and all subjects respectively. The BodPod showed a significant negative relationship (p=0.04 and p<0.01) between constant error values and percent body fat from hydrostatic weighing but a non-significant negative relationship (p=0.16) for males. The DEXA showed a significant positive relationship (p <0.01 and p=0.05) between constant error and percent body fat for hydrostatic weighing for males and all subjects respectively. CONCLUSION: The BodPod underestimated individuals with less fat mass and overestimated individuals with more fat mass. The Hologic DEXA consistently overestimated percent fat in all individuals.