Hand-to-hand bioelectrical impedance (HH BIA) is a low-cost method to estimate percent body fat (%BF). The BIA method is consistently reliable, but questions on validity remain. We have observed anecdotally that elbow position can render consistently different measures of %BF while using HH BIA, thus leading to the question: Does elbow angle influence the validity of measures derived using HH BIA? The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of elbow position (i.e., IN=flexed to 90° versus OUT=fully extended) on the reliability of HH BIA on 44 male and 24 female healthy adults (age=21±2 yrs, BMI=23±3). An additional aim was to assess the validity of the HH BIA %BF on a subset of subjects (n=12) using air displacement plethysmography (BOD POD®) as the criterion measure. The IN position was ~4%BF lower than the OUT position for HH BIA (p=0.05, effect size=0.67). Measures of %BF for both trials for the IN [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.99, coefficient of variation (CV)=2.99%] and OUT (ICC=0.99, CV=1.48%) conditions were highly reliable. On the subsample, the OUT (18.3±6.7 %BF) position exceeded both the IN (14.5±7.4 %BF) and the BOD POD® (16.1±7.8 %BF) measures (p<0.05); however, IN and BOD POD® measures of %BF did not differ (p=0.21). These findings support that HH BIA is a reliable measure at both elbow positions; however, %BF estimations vary considerably (~4%) with respect to the criterion measure depending on elbow position. The OUT position was found to overestimate criteria %BF. Further research may reveal an optimum elbow angle position for HH BIA estimates of %BF.
I like the quality of the print & overall service. The paper looks quite impressive. Hope this will attract interested readers. All of you have our best wishes for continued success.
Arshad Khan
“It was a delightful experience publishing my manuscript with the Clinical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. They offered me lots of opportunities I never had from most publishing houses and the...
Department of Agricultural Economics, Agribusiness...
Akowuah Jones Asafo
Your journal has accomplished its intended mission of providing very effective and efficient goals in dealing with submissions, conducting the reviewing process and in publishing accepted manuscripts ...
University of Jacqmar, Inc., USA
John St. Cyr
I think that Heighpubs very good. You are very helpful. Thank you for everything.
Ana Ribeiro
Regarding to be services, we note that are work with high standards of professionalism translated into quick response, efficiency which makes communication accessible. Furthermore, I believe to be muc...
Amélia João Alice Nkutxi
Publishing an article is a long process, but working with your publication department made things go smoothly, even though the process took exactly 5 months from the time of submitting the article til...
Anas Diab
I am to express my view that Heighten Science Publications are reliable quick even after peer review process. I hope and wish the publications will go a long way in disseminating science to many inter...
College of Fisheries, CAU(I), Tripura, India
Ajit Kumar Roy
"This is my first time publishing with the journal/publisher. I am impressed at the promptness of the publishing staff and the professionalism displayed. Thank you for encouraging young researchers li...
Ajite Kayode
Submission of paper was smooth, the review process was fast. I had excellent communication and on time response from the editor.
Ayokunle Dada
I would like to thank this journal for publishing my Research Article. Something I really appreciate about this journal is, they did not take much time from the day of Submission to the publishing dat...
HSPI: We're glad you're here. Please click "create a new Query" if you are a new visitor to our website and need further information from us.
If you are already a member of our network and need to keep track of any developments regarding a question you have already submitted, click "take me to my Query."