Reliability of Anthropometry-Based Equations Compared to Dual Energy Absorptiometry for Assessing Body Composition in Predialysis Chronic Kidney Disease—A Longitudinal Study
Skinfold thickness measurements for assessing body composition are reported to have good reproducibility compared to the reference method of dual energy absorptiometry (DXA). In the current study, we compared the level of agreement between body composition measured with DXA and skinfold thickness (S...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of renal nutrition 2020-05, Vol.30 (3), p.216-222 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 222 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 216 |
container_title | Journal of renal nutrition |
container_volume | 30 |
creator | Dubey, Avinash Kumar Priyamvada, P.S. Sahoo, Jayaprakash Vairappan, Balasubramaniyan Haridasan, Satish Parameswaran, Sreejith |
description | Skinfold thickness measurements for assessing body composition are reported to have good reproducibility compared to the reference method of dual energy absorptiometry (DXA). In the current study, we compared the level of agreement between body composition measured with DXA and skinfold thickness (SFT) in CKD Stage 3 and 4, at 2 occasions, 6 months apart.
Body composition was assessed in 177 Indian patients with CKD Stage 3 and 4 using DXA and anthropometry (SFT). The body fat mass obtained by the 2 methods was compared by paired t-test, intraclass correlation coefficients, regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots. A linear regression analysis was done to identify the patient-related parameters which would account for the intermethod differences between DXA and SFT.
Compared to DXA, SFT underestimated the fat mass at baseline as well as 6 months [DXA vs. SFT at entry: 15.85 kg (95% confidence interval, CI 15.07-16.65) vs. 13.71 kg (95% CI 13.21-14.32), P < .001; at 6 months: 16.13 (95% CI 15.33-16.93) vs. 13.85 (95% CI 13.25-14.45), P < .001]. The intraclass correlation coefficients at entry and 6 months were 0.894 (0.857-0.921) and 0.896 (0.860-0.923), respectively. The intermethod differences between DXA and SFT at baseline and 6 months were comparable: 2.08 kg (95% CI 1.66-2.5) at baseline versus 2.27 kg (95% CI 1.83-2.71) at 6 months, P = 0.200. Gender and body mass index turned out to be the significant predictors of intermethod differences at base line and exit (P < .001).
SFT-based measurements show good reproducibility compared to DXA over a period of 6 months. However, SFT systematically underestimates the fat mass by 2 Kg compared to DXA. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1053/j.jrn.2019.08.007 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2311922821</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1051227619303218</els_id><sourcerecordid>2311922821</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-93fae8c14756fd13d5af1a525515296c49eb11dd4cf82a43fe1ab4adf47e56b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUuO1DAURSMEoj-wACbIQyYJ_sT5iFG6uhoQJYGg55ZjPxcuJXbaTlrKjEWwD_bESnB1NQwZvaene8-VfbPsFcEFwZy9PRSH4AqKSVvgpsC4fpKdE85o3nDMnqYdc5JTWldn2UWMB4wJ4Q19np0xUtVtW_Hz7NdXGKzs7WDnFXmDOjd_D37yI8xhza9kBI22d4ucrXcRbfw4yZBOs0fXixzQ1kHYr6jrow9T0jzYkPEBdTFCjNbt0ZXX64PTR3vEIOvQlwSxclijTdAU6KxCn6x2sKJrGyHF_v7xs0M77_Z2XrR1KetbWtYX2TMjhwgvH-dldnuzvd18yHef33_cdLtcMc7mvGVGQqNIWfPKaMI0l4ZITjknnLaVKlvoCdG6VKahsmQGiOxLqU1ZA696dpm9OWGn4O8WiLMYbVQwDNKBX6KgjJCW0oaSJCUnqQo-xgBGTMGOMqyCYHGsSRxEqkkcaxK4Eamm5Hn9iF_6EfQ_x99ekuDdSQDpjfcWgojKglPp1wKoWWhv_4P_A3cRqMs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2311922821</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reliability of Anthropometry-Based Equations Compared to Dual Energy Absorptiometry for Assessing Body Composition in Predialysis Chronic Kidney Disease—A Longitudinal Study</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Dubey, Avinash Kumar ; Priyamvada, P.S. ; Sahoo, Jayaprakash ; Vairappan, Balasubramaniyan ; Haridasan, Satish ; Parameswaran, Sreejith</creator><creatorcontrib>Dubey, Avinash Kumar ; Priyamvada, P.S. ; Sahoo, Jayaprakash ; Vairappan, Balasubramaniyan ; Haridasan, Satish ; Parameswaran, Sreejith</creatorcontrib><description>Skinfold thickness measurements for assessing body composition are reported to have good reproducibility compared to the reference method of dual energy absorptiometry (DXA). In the current study, we compared the level of agreement between body composition measured with DXA and skinfold thickness (SFT) in CKD Stage 3 and 4, at 2 occasions, 6 months apart.
Body composition was assessed in 177 Indian patients with CKD Stage 3 and 4 using DXA and anthropometry (SFT). The body fat mass obtained by the 2 methods was compared by paired t-test, intraclass correlation coefficients, regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots. A linear regression analysis was done to identify the patient-related parameters which would account for the intermethod differences between DXA and SFT.
Compared to DXA, SFT underestimated the fat mass at baseline as well as 6 months [DXA vs. SFT at entry: 15.85 kg (95% confidence interval, CI 15.07-16.65) vs. 13.71 kg (95% CI 13.21-14.32), P < .001; at 6 months: 16.13 (95% CI 15.33-16.93) vs. 13.85 (95% CI 13.25-14.45), P < .001]. The intraclass correlation coefficients at entry and 6 months were 0.894 (0.857-0.921) and 0.896 (0.860-0.923), respectively. The intermethod differences between DXA and SFT at baseline and 6 months were comparable: 2.08 kg (95% CI 1.66-2.5) at baseline versus 2.27 kg (95% CI 1.83-2.71) at 6 months, P = 0.200. Gender and body mass index turned out to be the significant predictors of intermethod differences at base line and exit (P < .001).
SFT-based measurements show good reproducibility compared to DXA over a period of 6 months. However, SFT systematically underestimates the fat mass by 2 Kg compared to DXA.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1051-2276</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-8503</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1053/j.jrn.2019.08.007</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31679965</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><ispartof>Journal of renal nutrition, 2020-05, Vol.30 (3), p.216-222</ispartof><rights>2019 National Kidney Foundation, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-93fae8c14756fd13d5af1a525515296c49eb11dd4cf82a43fe1ab4adf47e56b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-93fae8c14756fd13d5af1a525515296c49eb11dd4cf82a43fe1ab4adf47e56b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1708-4864 ; 0000-0002-8805-143X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.jrn.2019.08.007$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31679965$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dubey, Avinash Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Priyamvada, P.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sahoo, Jayaprakash</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vairappan, Balasubramaniyan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haridasan, Satish</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parameswaran, Sreejith</creatorcontrib><title>Reliability of Anthropometry-Based Equations Compared to Dual Energy Absorptiometry for Assessing Body Composition in Predialysis Chronic Kidney Disease—A Longitudinal Study</title><title>Journal of renal nutrition</title><addtitle>J Ren Nutr</addtitle><description>Skinfold thickness measurements for assessing body composition are reported to have good reproducibility compared to the reference method of dual energy absorptiometry (DXA). In the current study, we compared the level of agreement between body composition measured with DXA and skinfold thickness (SFT) in CKD Stage 3 and 4, at 2 occasions, 6 months apart.
Body composition was assessed in 177 Indian patients with CKD Stage 3 and 4 using DXA and anthropometry (SFT). The body fat mass obtained by the 2 methods was compared by paired t-test, intraclass correlation coefficients, regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots. A linear regression analysis was done to identify the patient-related parameters which would account for the intermethod differences between DXA and SFT.
Compared to DXA, SFT underestimated the fat mass at baseline as well as 6 months [DXA vs. SFT at entry: 15.85 kg (95% confidence interval, CI 15.07-16.65) vs. 13.71 kg (95% CI 13.21-14.32), P < .001; at 6 months: 16.13 (95% CI 15.33-16.93) vs. 13.85 (95% CI 13.25-14.45), P < .001]. The intraclass correlation coefficients at entry and 6 months were 0.894 (0.857-0.921) and 0.896 (0.860-0.923), respectively. The intermethod differences between DXA and SFT at baseline and 6 months were comparable: 2.08 kg (95% CI 1.66-2.5) at baseline versus 2.27 kg (95% CI 1.83-2.71) at 6 months, P = 0.200. Gender and body mass index turned out to be the significant predictors of intermethod differences at base line and exit (P < .001).
SFT-based measurements show good reproducibility compared to DXA over a period of 6 months. However, SFT systematically underestimates the fat mass by 2 Kg compared to DXA.</description><issn>1051-2276</issn><issn>1532-8503</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kUuO1DAURSMEoj-wACbIQyYJ_sT5iFG6uhoQJYGg55ZjPxcuJXbaTlrKjEWwD_bESnB1NQwZvaene8-VfbPsFcEFwZy9PRSH4AqKSVvgpsC4fpKdE85o3nDMnqYdc5JTWldn2UWMB4wJ4Q19np0xUtVtW_Hz7NdXGKzs7WDnFXmDOjd_D37yI8xhza9kBI22d4ucrXcRbfw4yZBOs0fXixzQ1kHYr6jrow9T0jzYkPEBdTFCjNbt0ZXX64PTR3vEIOvQlwSxclijTdAU6KxCn6x2sKJrGyHF_v7xs0M77_Z2XrR1KetbWtYX2TMjhwgvH-dldnuzvd18yHef33_cdLtcMc7mvGVGQqNIWfPKaMI0l4ZITjknnLaVKlvoCdG6VKahsmQGiOxLqU1ZA696dpm9OWGn4O8WiLMYbVQwDNKBX6KgjJCW0oaSJCUnqQo-xgBGTMGOMqyCYHGsSRxEqkkcaxK4Eamm5Hn9iF_6EfQ_x99ekuDdSQDpjfcWgojKglPp1wKoWWhv_4P_A3cRqMs</recordid><startdate>202005</startdate><enddate>202005</enddate><creator>Dubey, Avinash Kumar</creator><creator>Priyamvada, P.S.</creator><creator>Sahoo, Jayaprakash</creator><creator>Vairappan, Balasubramaniyan</creator><creator>Haridasan, Satish</creator><creator>Parameswaran, Sreejith</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1708-4864</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8805-143X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202005</creationdate><title>Reliability of Anthropometry-Based Equations Compared to Dual Energy Absorptiometry for Assessing Body Composition in Predialysis Chronic Kidney Disease—A Longitudinal Study</title><author>Dubey, Avinash Kumar ; Priyamvada, P.S. ; Sahoo, Jayaprakash ; Vairappan, Balasubramaniyan ; Haridasan, Satish ; Parameswaran, Sreejith</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-93fae8c14756fd13d5af1a525515296c49eb11dd4cf82a43fe1ab4adf47e56b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dubey, Avinash Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Priyamvada, P.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sahoo, Jayaprakash</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vairappan, Balasubramaniyan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haridasan, Satish</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parameswaran, Sreejith</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of renal nutrition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dubey, Avinash Kumar</au><au>Priyamvada, P.S.</au><au>Sahoo, Jayaprakash</au><au>Vairappan, Balasubramaniyan</au><au>Haridasan, Satish</au><au>Parameswaran, Sreejith</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reliability of Anthropometry-Based Equations Compared to Dual Energy Absorptiometry for Assessing Body Composition in Predialysis Chronic Kidney Disease—A Longitudinal Study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of renal nutrition</jtitle><addtitle>J Ren Nutr</addtitle><date>2020-05</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>216</spage><epage>222</epage><pages>216-222</pages><issn>1051-2276</issn><eissn>1532-8503</eissn><abstract>Skinfold thickness measurements for assessing body composition are reported to have good reproducibility compared to the reference method of dual energy absorptiometry (DXA). In the current study, we compared the level of agreement between body composition measured with DXA and skinfold thickness (SFT) in CKD Stage 3 and 4, at 2 occasions, 6 months apart.
Body composition was assessed in 177 Indian patients with CKD Stage 3 and 4 using DXA and anthropometry (SFT). The body fat mass obtained by the 2 methods was compared by paired t-test, intraclass correlation coefficients, regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots. A linear regression analysis was done to identify the patient-related parameters which would account for the intermethod differences between DXA and SFT.
Compared to DXA, SFT underestimated the fat mass at baseline as well as 6 months [DXA vs. SFT at entry: 15.85 kg (95% confidence interval, CI 15.07-16.65) vs. 13.71 kg (95% CI 13.21-14.32), P < .001; at 6 months: 16.13 (95% CI 15.33-16.93) vs. 13.85 (95% CI 13.25-14.45), P < .001]. The intraclass correlation coefficients at entry and 6 months were 0.894 (0.857-0.921) and 0.896 (0.860-0.923), respectively. The intermethod differences between DXA and SFT at baseline and 6 months were comparable: 2.08 kg (95% CI 1.66-2.5) at baseline versus 2.27 kg (95% CI 1.83-2.71) at 6 months, P = 0.200. Gender and body mass index turned out to be the significant predictors of intermethod differences at base line and exit (P < .001).
SFT-based measurements show good reproducibility compared to DXA over a period of 6 months. However, SFT systematically underestimates the fat mass by 2 Kg compared to DXA.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>31679965</pmid><doi>10.1053/j.jrn.2019.08.007</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1708-4864</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8805-143X</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1051-2276 |
ispartof | Journal of renal nutrition, 2020-05, Vol.30 (3), p.216-222 |
issn | 1051-2276 1532-8503 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2311922821 |
source | ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
title | Reliability of Anthropometry-Based Equations Compared to Dual Energy Absorptiometry for Assessing Body Composition in Predialysis Chronic Kidney Disease—A Longitudinal Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T06%3A12%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reliability%20of%20Anthropometry-Based%20Equations%20Compared%20to%20Dual%20Energy%20Absorptiometry%20for%20Assessing%20Body%20Composition%20in%20Predialysis%20Chronic%20Kidney%20Disease%E2%80%94A%20Longitudinal%20Study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20renal%20nutrition&rft.au=Dubey,%20Avinash%20Kumar&rft.date=2020-05&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=216&rft.epage=222&rft.pages=216-222&rft.issn=1051-2276&rft.eissn=1532-8503&rft_id=info:doi/10.1053/j.jrn.2019.08.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2311922821%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2311922821&rft_id=info:pmid/31679965&rft_els_id=S1051227619303218&rfr_iscdi=true |