Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 27, 2026
Evaluation of Changes in Hydration and Body Cell Mass with Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis after Exercise Program for Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients
Published on: July 14, 2023
Agreement Between Standing Eight-Point Multifrequency Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis and Dual-Energy X-Ray
Dimitrios Balampanos1, Theodoros Stampoulis1, Alexandra Avloniti1
1Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, School of Physical Education, Sport Science and Occupational Therapy, Democritus University of Thrace, 69100 Komotini, Greece.
Multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MF-BIA) shows strong associations with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for body composition but has systematic bias. MF-BIA is suitable for group assessments, not precise individual measurements.
Area of Science:
- Body composition analysis
- Biomedical engineering
- Human physiology
Background:
- Multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MF-BIA) is a practical alternative to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for body composition assessment.
- MF-BIA device, population, and outcome-specific estimates necessitate validation against reference methods.
- This study validates a standing 8-point MF-BIA device against DXA in Greek adults.
Purpose of the Study:
- To examine the agreement, concordance, and systematic bias between a standing 8-point MF-BIA device and DXA.
- To compare MF-BIA and DXA estimates for fat mass (FM), fat-free mass (FFM), body fat percentage (BF%), and appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM).
- To analyze agreement and error magnitude by sex and BMI category.
Main Methods:
- 1250 Greek adults (18-80 years) underwent same-day DXA and MF-BIA (Charder MA801) assessments.
- Statistical analyses included Pearson correlations, Bland-Altman analysis, Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), MAE, RMSE, and proportional bias testing.
- Data were analyzed stratified by sex and BMI category.
Main Results:
- MF-BIA demonstrated strong associations with DXA outcomes but exhibited systematic bias.
- MF-BIA underestimated BF% and FM, and overestimated FFM in both sexes.
- Concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was highest for FM, while proportional bias was observed for BF%, FM, ASM, and FFM (in women).
Conclusions:
- The MA801 MF-BIA device shows strong associations and outcome-specific concordance with DXA.
- Systematic bias and individual-level errors limit the interchangeability of MF-BIA with DXA for precise individual assessment.
- MF-BIA may be useful for group-level or repeated same-device assessments under standardized conditions.
