Standing 8-Electrode Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis as an Alternative Method to Estimate Visceral Fat Area and Body Fat Mass in Athletes

PURPOSE: To investigate the potential of standing 8-electrode bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) for assessing visceral fat area (VFA) and body fat mass (BFM) in athletes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 95 subjects (50 males and 45 females) were recruited. VFA and BFM measurements were obtained using three standing 8-electrode BIA devices, InBody230, InBody770, and IOI353. These acquired VFA and BFM were expressed as VFA(IOI353), VFA(InBody230), VFA(InBody770) V, BFM(IOI353), BFM(InBody230), and BFM(InBody770,) respectively. As reference measurement, the VFA acquired from computer tomography (CT) was expressed as VFA(CT), and the BFM measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was denoted as BFM(DXA). RESULTS: The coefficient of determination (r(2)) in regression analysis between the measurements by VFA(IOI353), VFA(InBody230), VFA(InBody770) and VFA(CT) were 0.425, 0.492, and 0.473, respectively. Also, the limits of agreement (LOA) obtained from Bland–Altman analysis were −25.18 to 56.62, −29.74 to 62.44, and −32.96 to 71.93 cm(2). For BFM, r(2) in regression analysis between the measurements by BFM(IOI353), BFM(InBody230), BFM(InBody770) and BMF(DXA) were 0.894, 0.950, and 0.955, respectively; LOA were −7.21 to 5.75, −4.70 to 4.05, and −5.48 to 3.05 kg, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results showed when assessing BFM, these instruments delivered comparable measurements, and the degree of agreement ranged from excellent to moderate compared with the reference method. However, when assessing VFA, the agreements were weak. Therefore, the application of standing 8-electrode BIA devices for assessing athletes’ VFA still needs improvement.