Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

Validity of Various Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Devices vs the Bod Pod for Body Composition

Blakley, Alivia
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=csu155934084847866

Abstract Details

2019, Master of Education, Cleveland State University, College of Education and Human Services.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the validity of various BIA devices compared to a criterion, the Bod Pod. It was hypothesized that (1) there would be no significant difference in the various BIA devices (Seca, Inbody, Tanita, Omron) as compared to the Bod Pod, for validity and reliability, (2) there would be no significant difference in total body water as measured by the Seca and Tanita, and (3) there would be significant differences in weight as measured by four of the five devices (Bod Pod, Seca, Tanita, Inbody). Methods: Forty participants, ages 18-31 years, 20 female and 20 males, were included in this study. Participants were tested on five devices (Bod Pod, Seca, Tanita, Omron, and Inbody), on the same day. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess device differences for percent fat and lean mass. For device differences, protected t-tests were used. Pearson correlations were used to assess predictive validity of each device vs the Bod Pod. Results: For percent fat, the Omron (20.5%) significantly (p < 0.05) underestimated percent fat as compared to all other devices: Bod Pod (24.1%), Seca (24.5%), Inbody (24.6%), Tanita (23.6%). The Omron also significantly (p < 0.05) overestimated lean mass as compared to all other devices. Reliability of each device was high (r2 range = 0.995-1.000). There were no significant differences in total body water measured on the Seca (89.3 l) and the Tanita (90.0 l) BIA devices. For body weight, the Seca (73.5 kg) and the Inbody (73.7 kg) were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than the Bod Pod (73.4 kg) and the Tanita (73.4 kg). Conclusion: The Omron significantly underestimated percent fat and overestimated lean body mass when compared to all other devices. The Seca, Inbody, and Tanita all showed acceptable validity as compared to the Bod Pod. However, the Omron is not recommended for body composition analysis.
Kathleen Little (Committee Chair)
Kenneth Sparks (Committee Member)
Emily Kullman (Committee Member)
Health Education; Health Sciences

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Blakley, A. (2019). Validity of Various Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Devices vs the Bod Pod for Body Composition [Master's thesis, Cleveland State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=csu155934084847866

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Blakley, Alivia. Validity of Various Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Devices vs the Bod Pod for Body Composition . 2019. Cleveland State University, Master's thesis. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=csu155934084847866.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Blakley, Alivia. "Validity of Various Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Devices vs the Bod Pod for Body Composition ." Master's thesis, Cleveland State University, 2019. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=csu155934084847866

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)

csu155934084847866
4,917
© 2019, some rights reserved.Creative Commons License Validity of Various Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Devices vs the Bod Pod for Body Composition by Alivia Blakley is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at etd.ohiolink.edu.
This open access ETD is published by Cleveland State University and OhioLINK.