Premium
Generalized bioelectric impedance‐based equations underestimate body fluids in athletes
Author(s) -
Coratella Giuseppe,
Campa Francesco,
Matias Catari.,
Toselli Stefania,
Koury Josely C.,
Andreoli Angela,
Sardinha Luis B.,
Silva Analiza M.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
scandinavian journal of medicine and science in sports
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.575
H-Index - 115
eISSN - 1600-0838
pISSN - 0905-7188
DOI - 10.1111/sms.14033
Subject(s) - athletes , bioelectrical impedance analysis , body water , medicine , extracellular fluid , generalized estimating equation , body fluid , body weight , mathematics , physical therapy , statistics , body mass index , chemistry , extracellular , biochemistry
The current study aimed: (i) to external validate total body water (TBW) and extracellular water (ECW) derived from athlete and non‐athlete predictive equations using radioisotope dilution techniques as a reference criterion in male and female athletes; (ii) in a larger sample, to determine the agreement between specific and generalized equations when estimating body fluids in male and female athletes practicing different sports. A total of 1371 athletes (men: n = 921, age 23.9 ± 1.4 y; women: n = 450, age 27.3 ± 6.8 y) participated in this study. All athletes underwent bioelectrical impedance analyses, while TBW and ECW were assessed with dilution techniques in a subgroup of 185 participants (men: n = 132, age 21.7 ± 5.1 y; women: n = 53, age 20.3 ± 4.5 y). Two specific and eight generalized predictive equations were tested. Compared to the criterion methods, no mean bias was observed using the athlete‐specific equations for TBW and ECW (−0.32 to 0.05, p > 0.05) and the coefficient of determination ranged from R 2 = 0.83 to 0.94. The majority of the generalized predictive equations underestimated TBW and ECW ( p < 0.05); R 2 ranged from 0.66 to 0.89. In the larger sample, all the generalized equations showed lower TBW and ECW values (ranging from −6.58 to −0.19, p < 0.05) than specific predictive equations; except for TBW in female power/velocity (one equation) athletes and team sport (two equations). The use of generalized BIA‐based equations leads to an underestimation of TBW, and ECW compared to athlete‐specific predictive equations. Additionally, the larger sample indicates that generalized equations overall provided lower TBW and ECW compared to the athlete‐specific equations.