Abstract
Thirty Caucasian males (aged 19-32yr) participated in this study designed to investigate the reliability of multiple bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and near-infrared spectroscopy (Futrex, FTX) measurements and the validity of BIA and FTX estimations of hydrostatically (UW) determined percent body fat (%BF). Two BIA and two FTX instruments were used to make 6 measurements each of resistance (R) and optical density (OD) respectively over a 30 min period on two consecutive days. Repeated measures ANOVA indicated that FTX and BIA, using manufacturer's equations, significantly (p<0.01) under predicted UW by 2.4 and 3.8%BF respectively. Standard error of estimate (SEE) and total error (TE) terms provided by regression analysis for FTX (4.6 and 5.31%BF respectively) and BIA (5.65 and 6.95%BF, respectively) were high. Dependent t-tests revealed no significant differences in either FTX or BIA predictions of %BF using two machines. Intraclass reliabilities for BIA and FTX estimates of UW %BF across trials, days, and machines all exceeded 0.97. A significant random error term associated with FTX and a significant subject-by-day interaction associated with BIA was revealed using the generalizability model. Although FTX and BIA estimates of UW %BF were reliable, due to the significant underestimation of UW %BF and high SEE and TE, neither FTX nor BIA were considered valid estimates of hydrostatically determined %BF.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
