Page 1 of 16

European Journal of Applied Sciences – Vol. 11, No. 1

Publication Date: January 25, 2023

DOI:10.14738/aivp.111.13890. Mangia, C. M. F., Carneluti, A., Kopelman, B. I., De-Carvalho, W. B., & Andrade, M. C. (2023). Repeatibility and Reproducibility

(RR) of Bioelectric Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol -

11(1). 303-318.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Repeatibility and Reproducibility (RR) of Bioelectric

Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass

Cristina Malzoni Ferreira Mangia

Pediatric Critical Care Division, Escola Paulista de Medicina,

Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil.

Alexandre Carneluti

Faculdade de Medicina, FMABC, Brazil.

Benjamin Israel Kopelman

Pediatric Department, Escola Paulista de Medicina,

Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil

Werther Brunow De-Carvalho

Pediatric Critical Care Division, Universidade São Paulo

Maria Cristina Andrade

Pediatric Nephrology Division, Escola Paulista de Medicina,

Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil

ABSTRACT

Background: Bioelectrical analysis measures two bioelectrical vectors: resistance

(R) and reactance (Xc). Resistance is the pure opposition of a biological conductor

to the flow of an alternating current through the intra and extra-cellular ionic

solution and it is inversely related to the dynamics of body fluids and body

composition. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the reference

values of the indexes bioelectrical impedance (BI) for children of normal body mass

index in southeastern Brazil of middle-income country. Methods: Two hundred

eighty-one children with normal body mass index were included in the study (135

female and 146 male), aged 4 to 129 months, selected from federal public urban

school in São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil, where bioelectrical impedance values

resistance (R) and reactance (Xc) values were measured in order to establish

reference values of these parameters. Results: The anthropometric variables, body

mass index, z-scores and bioelectrical impedance parameters were evaluated. For

both genders, the mean and standard deviation of anthropometric variables were

age (months): 73.42 + 34.65; weight (kg): 23.5 + 9.46; height (m): 1.16+0.22; BMI

(kg/m2): 16.65+1,75; Xc (ohms): 63.92+9.6; R (ohms): 749+75.26. For analysis, the

children were stratified into three groups for each gender, being divided by ages: 4

to 23 months; 24 to 71 months and 72 to 129 months. Linear regression analysis

showed R had a significant progressive decrease with age (p=0.0003) while Xc had

a progressive increase (p=0.0065) with age increase. We analyzed by multiple

regression the associations between R and Xc with anthropometric variables by age

group to establish the reference values, confidence intervals and the tolerance

limits for a new individual observation. Test-Retest Repeatability between three

Page 2 of 16

304

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 1, January-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

repeat and consecutive measurements was considered excellent. Intraclass

correlation coefficient and Bland -Altman reproducibility was for reactance 0.755,

Resistance 0.98 and phase angle was 0.93. Conclusion: The BI reference values were

established, in a field where there is a relative lack of publications, and we collected

relevant information about resistance and reactance in a population of middle

income setting that could be used in epidemiologic studies and could be used

reference value in children with altered body composition.

INTRODUCTION

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a fast, and inexpensive method that has been widely

applied to evaluate the body composition for over thirty years [1,2,3,4].

Impedance (Z) is an electrical property of ionic conduction measurable through soft tissue

(except fat and bone) and measures two bioelectrical vectors: resistance (R) and reactance (Xc).

The resistance vector is the opposition of a conductor to the flow of alternating electric current

through intracellular and extracellular ionic solutions and represents the real part of the

impedance. In a biological conductor, current is mainly carried by ions and aqueous solutions.

The reactance vector is the capacitance produced by tissue interfaces and cell membranes and

represents the imaginary part of Z (PICCOLI et al, 1998). It is reciprocal to electrical

capacitance, that is, it is the voltage stored by a biological capacitor for a brief period (LUKASKI

et al, 1996).

When an electric current is applied, when encountering a capacitive element, a phase difference

is created between the current and the applied voltage, determined by the reactive component

of R, which is represented geometrically by the phase angle. (BAUMGARTNER et al, 1988;

PICCOLI et al, 1998). The phase angle (in degrees) is the angle that the impedance vector makes

with its resistive component and is calculated as the arctangent of the ratio of reactance to

resistance.

The use of bioelectrical impedance to estimate body composition variables is based on the

hypothesis that fat-free tissues are good conductors at fixed frequencies and poor conductors

under alternating current, when compared to adipose tissue.

The body bioelectrical impedance technique is useful in the analysis of body composition, as it

allows health professionals to manage and prevent nutritional problems. Additionally, the

growing interest in the study of body composition and its variations as a method of assess in

nutritional status grows over the years as well as recognition of its importance for the

assessment of healthy and sick individuals [7,8].

BI has a hypothetical inverse relationship to the body’s volume and can be used in regression

prediction models to estimate total body water (TBW). It is based on a bi-compartmental

model, which divides the body into lean mass (LM) -high conductivity, a fact that reduces

resistance (R) and fat mass (FM) – low conductivity that increases body resistance (R)

Bioimpedance vectors (resistance and reactance) are rarely referred to in the literature as

vectors that reflect the dynamics of body fluids and the electrical properties of tissues. How

impedance vectors behave in individuals with body composition distortions, such as critically

ill patients, is a challenge that has not yet been fully clarified.

Page 3 of 16

305

Mangia, C. M. F., Carneluti, A., Kopelman, B. I., De-Carvalho, W. B., & Andrade, M. C. (2023). Repeatibility and Reproducibility (RR) of Bioelectric

Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(1). 303-318.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.111.13890

However, there has been a growing interest in the use of these body bioimpedance vectors,

reactance (Xc) and resistance (R), as a way to assess hydration (resistance) and cell

permeability disorders (reactance) [5]

The monitoring of primary indices of bioimpedance, resistance (R) and reactance (Xc) has great

applicability in the scenario of critically ill patients, as it can be considered a non-invasive way

of predicting the patient's prognosis, acute malnutrition, assessment of fluid responsiveness,

cumulative fluid balance considering Xc can reflect the from a biophysical point of view changes

in the permeability of the endothelium and cell membrane. [6-10]

There is a relative lack of publications in the field of bioelectrical parameters reference values

on specific population such as low- and middle-income countries. For this reason, few studies

are reported to accurately assess nutritional individual deviations in relation to these

population mean and to analyze the role of bioelectrical parameters on various outcomes in the

clinical setting and epidemiological studies [11,12]

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the repeatability and reproducibility of BIA in

children with normal body mass index in southeastern Brazil.

METHODS

Data were collected in healthy children aged 4months to 129 months at a federal elementary

school in São Paulo city, Brazil. The children belonged to families that have the socio-economic

status of the majority of the Brazilian population, being in the middle-income population of

Brazil. The protocol was approved by the committee of ethics on research and the school’s

authorities.

Study Population

Three hundred, twenty-seven children of both genders were recruited after an interviewing

their parents and obtaining a signed written informed consent. The admission criteria for this

study were: a) z- score between –2 and +2, b) fasting state > 3 hours and c) no vigorous physical

activity in the 24 hours prior to the tests. The exclusion criteria were a) undernutrition [z-score

<-2], b) obesity [z-score > +2], c) acutely ill children, and d) those who were under medications.

Anthropometric Measurement

The anthropometric measurements were obtained by the principal investigator who was

previously trained to perform the measurements. The anthropometric measurement

procedures were undertaken in strict accordance with the methodology described in

previously published papers. [8,9,10]

The body weight was measured to a precision of 0.1 Kg with an electronic beam-balance in

children over 23.9 months of age. In children under 23.9 months, the body weight was

measured to a precision of 0.01 kg using an electronic scale. The body-height was measured by

a stadiometer to a precision of 0.1 cm for all age groups. The children were measured without

shoes and wearing underwear. The age, body weight and height were used to calculate the z- score. We used the relationship weight-for-height (W/H index) for the nutritional assessment

of the children over 23.9 months of age and for children under 23.9 months, the weight-for-age

Page 4 of 16

306

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 1, January-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

(W/A index) and weight-for-height (W/H index). The values obtained were compared to

standard reference values.

We used version 1.02 of the ANTHRO program from the Nutrition Division of the Disease

Control Center (CDC). To calculate the z score, comparisons were made between the z scores

obtained with the curves of the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), using cutoff values

to define the nutritional condition ± 2 z scores. We determined the body mass indices (BMI) -

weight (kg) divided by the square of height in meters - for each child, which were also compared

with the NCHS values. Thus, only children with a Z score and BMI within the normal values

established by the NCHS were included in the main study [13]

Bioimpedance Measurements

Whole-body electrical resistance and reactance were measured with a bioimpedance analyser

(Biodynamics model 310; Biodynamics Corporation, Seattle, WA) of alternate current at 800

μA and 50 kHz in tetrapolar arrangement.

Whole-body electrical resistance and reactance were measured with a bioelectrical impedance

analyzer that measure resistance and reactance independently and separately. (Biodynamics

model 310; Biodynamics Corporation, Seattle, WA) of alternate current at 800 μA and 50 kHz

in tetrapolar arrangement. Oil was removed from the skin by cleaning it with alcohol. No direct

contact was made with the child’s skin during measurements, and the children were calm and

relaxed [14,15,16]. For children under 18 months of age (where cooperation was more

difficult), we made a cylindrical non-conducting polyethylene, a type of non-toxic, lightweight,

flexible, and waterproof plastic with the objective of positioning the children correctly, i.e., in

dorsal decubitus with arms and legs separated and in abduction at 30 degrees from the trunk.

That frame was not used with older children, and the supine positioning was maintained. We

positioned the electrodes in pairs on the right side of the body in the following anatomical

positions: 1- Right hand: The current injector electrode was positioned in the middle of the

dorsal surfaces of the hand proximal to the third phalangeal-metacarpal joint. The detector

electrode was placed 4 cm below the wrist (group 1) or medially between the distal bony

prominences of the radius and ulna (group 2 and 3);2- Right foot: the current injector electrode

was positioned in the middle of the dorsal surfaces of the foot to the third metatarsal- phalangeal joint. The detector electrode was placed 4 cm on the ankle (group 1) or medially

between the medial and lateral malleoli at the ankle (group 2 and 3). Before each test, the

master power switch of analyzer was turned off and on. After pressing the on key, the analyzer

performs self-test to check the internal calibration accordance with the recommendation of the

manufacturer.

Repeatability and Reproducibility of Measurements

To preliminarily determine the repeatability and reproducibility of measurements, we

performed 3 consecutive measurements of R and Xc in all children (n = 280). The equipment

was turned off and after pressing the on key waiting for the self-test and reprogramming the

data for a new reading of R and Xc. This procedure was performed sequentially 3 times, and,

during the reprogramming intervals, without the child's movement. In 97 healthy children age

from 72 months to 123 months (n=97) repeatability and reproducibility measurements were

collected on two consecutive days, also.

Page 5 of 16

307

Mangia, C. M. F., Carneluti, A., Kopelman, B. I., De-Carvalho, W. B., & Andrade, M. C. (2023). Repeatibility and Reproducibility (RR) of Bioelectric

Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(1). 303-318.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.111.13890

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive analysis was expressed as mean, standard deviation and 95% confidence intervals

(CI). The inferential statistical analyses were performed using GCM and REG procedures of the

statistical software package SAS (Version6.0). Bivariate correlations and stepwise maximum

R2 was performed by multiple linear regression analyses to evaluate the strength and

variability of R and Xc with weight(W), height (H) by age and gender. A p value <0.05 was

considered statistically significant. [18] Multiple regression models and Pearson’s correlation

coefficient were used to assess the strength and relationship between R and Xc with weight

(W), height (H), age and sex. The fitted models were different from each other, according to the

sex and age group. Multiple regression models were then fitted for R and Xc as functions of

weight and height for each sex, considering age groups adapted from the Committee on

Nutrition Advisory to CDC and Waterloo et al [10,17]. Residual analysis was developed to

evaluate the adequacy of the fitted models. The fitted regression models, for each sex and age

group, according to the models:

R= a0 + a1*H + a2*W+ e and Xc = b0 + b1*H + b2*W + e

They were used to predict the average R, average Xc and confidence intervals. The statistical

analysis was accomplished by the SAS system V 6.0(SAS) Institute Inc, 1989. Repeatability and

reproducibility were analyzed using IBM SPSS version 20.0 for Windows (IBM Corp. Armonk,

NY, USA) and EXCEL for Windows version 10.0. Repeatability refers to the variation in repeated

measurements made on the same subject by the same operator under identical conditions

[19,20]. Reproducibility is the additional variability introduced when measurements are made

on same subjects but under different days. In the study was considered two consecutive days.

Repeatability and reproducibility studies can be assessed using reliability (inherent variability

in the true difference between measurements) and /or agreement (the quantified variation

between measurements). The analysis of reliability in this study was determined using

intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and agreement using Bland-Altman analysis. ICC values

≤ 0.5, 0.5-0.75, 0.75-0.9 and ≥ 0.9, were indicative of poor, moderate, good, and excellent

reliability. [19,20]

RESULTS

The variables were collected in 327 children during the same period of year. Children excluded

were: six were undernourished, fourteen obese and twenty-six had other exclusion criteria. The

final study population consisted of 281 healthy children with normal body mass index. Children

were previously stratified by three age-group due to low number: a) 4 months to 23 months

(group 1), b)24 months to 71 months (group 2), and c) 72 to129 months (group 3). The subject

characteristics are presented in Table 1. Linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate

if age-group stratification was appropriate to study the variability of the resistance and

reactance in relation to anthropometric variables. Figs. 1 and 2 shows that the stratification

was appropriate. In both graphics there are two inflection points, the first point at 23 months

and the second at 71 months. These two points were interpreted as indicative of the resistance

and reactance variations imposed by growth and development. The straight lines were

significantly different for the resistance (p=0.0003) and reactance (p=0.0065).

Page 6 of 16

308

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 1, January-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Correlation between Bioelectrical Impedance Components and Anthropometric Variables

Multivariate regression models were used to analyze the correlations between resistance and

reactance with anthropometric variables. The purpose of these models was to establish

confidence intervals for R and Xc for normal children and tolerance intervals for a new

observation. Tables 2 and 3 lists the multivariable regression equations. Due to the small

number of children for each gender in age group 1, one model was adjusted for both genders.

Pearson’s correlation coefficient between anthropometric variables and bioimpedance vector

components are described in Table 4. Weight and height were negatively correlated with

resistance in all age groups. The reactance was positively correlated with weight and height in

females in all age groups. Boys and girls did not differ in age, body weight and body height but

girls had a higher resistance than boys in groups 2 and 3. This difference in body resistance

between boys and girls was not found in the infants (group 1). Reactance increases with age,

having few variations between genders (Table 5). The regression models were used to estimate

Rand Xc mean and 90% to 99% confidence intervals (CI) for age group and gender. In addition,

we used the regression models to estimate the values expected of the impedance vectors and

the tolerance limits 90% to 99% for a new observation.

For analysis of repeatability and reproducibility, 97 children were studied belonging to the

group between 72 to 129 months (group 3). Measurements were taken under ideal conditions

of collaboration according to the technique previously described. The analyzes obtained on

days 1 and 2 were carried out under good conditions of the environment and temperature.

Test-Retest Repeatability between three repeat and consecutive measurements was

considered excellent. For Reactance test-retest was 0,949. For resistance for test re-test was

0,99. For phase angle test-retest repeatability was 0.98.

Intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland -Altman reproducibility between day 1 and Day 2

for reactance was 0.755. Resistance between day 1 and day 2 was 0.98 and phase angle between

day 1 and day 2 was 0.93. The Bland-Altman mean of differences plots are show in figures 4-6.

Simple regression analysis was performed to analyze whether the measurements obtained

agreement and whether there is potential bias in the analysis, that is, whether there is a

tendency, or whether the values tend to be above or below the mean differences. The value of

the mean significance analysis did not show a systematic trend, so there is no proportion bias

Simple regression analysis was performed to analyze whether the measurements obtained are

concordant and whether there is potential bias in the analysis. In other words, if the values tend

to be above or below the mean of differences. The value of the mean significance analysis for

reactance (p =0.785), resistance (p= 0.715) and phase angle (p>0.7) did not show a systematic

trend, so there is no proportion bias

DISCUSSION

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is considered a good method for estimating body

composition in the epidemiologic studies and at the bedside. It is safe, non-invasive, reliable,

rapid, inexpensive, portable, and it allows to repeated measures could be taken quickly [5]. We

studied separately R and Xc components grouping by age depending on the sample size and

gender. The three age groups adopted were based on Waterloo et al [10] stratification sampling

criteria, that clustered the children into relatively homogenous subgroups by age.

Page 7 of 16

309

Mangia, C. M. F., Carneluti, A., Kopelman, B. I., De-Carvalho, W. B., & Andrade, M. C. (2023). Repeatibility and Reproducibility (RR) of Bioelectric

Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(1). 303-318.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.111.13890

In addition, the skin electrodes were placed on anatomical position and those electrodes had

their patches width reduced in young children because there is a minimal distance required to

avoid interactions between electrodes [16].These criteria adopted by us were similar toother

studies in children where: 1) similar groups of children were considered; 2) skin electrodes

were placed in accordance with the child’s age;3) the children were separated in age–groups;

4) Xc vector component was not neglected; and 5)age-related variability was found in these

studies[1,14,15].The measures demonstrated that resistance measurements were

substantially higher in all age groups than those reported for adults. In healthy American adults,

that means range from432 to 485 ohms for men and 551 to 587 ohms for women and in healthy

Brazilian adults 552 +100 ohms in both genders. Our study demonstrated that resistance values

in young children were higher than older children, and these results are similar to those in the

previous studies [3,5,21]. We observed variability of the resistance and reactance parameters

with growth in our study, reinforcing the importance of the reference values of R and Xc by age

or age-group and gender in healthy populations of children. The variability of parameters might

be reflecting changes during growth as does intra and extra-cellular fluid distribution, cell

growth and changes in body mineral and electrolytic content, therefore, reflecting the

variability of fluids and body composition in children [22]. The study showed that resistance

decreases with age, which might be because the muscular mass of the limbs increases with

growth. These observations reinforce the concept whereby in the infants and toddlers, arms

and legs represent body area with small diameter and length, therefore the resistance is high.

With growth, there is an increase of the diameter and length of the limbs, and R decreases due

to an increase in the cross-sectional area of the extremities. These observations are according

to simple body-composition models where the appendicular skeletal muscles are the primary

electrical conductor [23,24,25,26]. We observed differences in the reactance among the three

study-groups. This might be due to the differences of capacitance properties of the tissue

interfaces and cell membranes. Theoretically, Xc variation among healthy individuals could be

due to differences in the capacitive behavior of the tissues associated with variability of the cell

size, membrane permeability or intracellular composition during growth [25,26].An increase

of interstitial fat (anhydrous, meaning that fat is hydrophobic) during maturation reduces both

the tissue interface permeability and cell membrane interface permeability, producing an

increase in reactance in a critical fixed frequency [27]. The variability of R and Xc might be

explained also by variations that include more and less conductive matter, body temperature,

tissue composition, fluid distribution, ionic concentration, nature of fat, as well anisotropic

effects of muscle fibers. These physiological and structural as well as technical factors affect the

measurement of both bioelectrical impedance vector components, R and Xc [3,4,6]. The

limitation of this study is that the sample cannot be considered representative of all millions of

Brazilian children because there is difference in the nutritional status among specific Brazilian

regions depending on the socioeconomic levels of population in each region of Brazil. In order

to minimize population bias, the epidemiologic procedure performed in this study consisted of

selecting a school with children from families with middle income resources. Our study is the

first and only one study already realized in Brazil to establish bioelectrical impedance vectors

reference values in children for several age groups and gender.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we established the normative bivariate 90% to 99% confidence intervals for the

mean impedance indexes by group and gender and the bivariate predictive values 90% to

99%tolerance limits for new individual measurements of the resistance and reactance in

Page 8 of 16

310

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 1, January-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

healthy Brazilian children. Further, changes in resistance and reactance with age are well- established. Our findings add substantial information in a field with relative lack of

publications.

Contributions

This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. CMFM designed the study,

performed the statistical analysis, wrote the protocol, and wrote the first and final draft of the

manuscript. AC Carneluti A managed the literature searches, performed critical analysis and

edited the final draft of the manuscript. CMFM and MCA wrote the first draft of manuscript.

MCA performed critical analysis of manuscript and reviewed the final draft. BIK and WBC

contributed with ideas, methodology and All authors read and approved the final manuscript

Consent

As per international standard, parental written consent has been collected and preserved by

the author(s).

Ethical

Approval The protocol was approved by the committee of ethics on research of the

Universidade Federal de São Paulo and the school’s authorities.

Acknowledgements

Dr Cristina Mangia MD, PhD would kindly like to thank the Professor João Augusto Mattar MD,

MSc, PhD, FCCM (in memoriam) for his indispensable and valuable teaching on the

bioimpedance in normal subjects and critically ill patients concepts and ever-present support

for my studies on bioelectrical impedance in children. In addition, I would like to thank Gabriela

Stangenhaus, PhD from Statistika Consultoria Inc, Professor Werther Brunow de Carvalho MD,

PhD and Professor Benjamin Israel Kopelman, MD, PhD.].

References

1. Davies PSW. Body composition assessment. Arch Dis Child. 1993; 69:337-338.

2. Hammond J, Rona RJ, Chinn S. Estimation in community surveys of total body fat of children using

bioelectrical impedance or skinfold thickness measurements. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1994;48: 164-171.

3. Lukaski HC, Bolonchuck WW, Hall CB, Siders WA. Validation of tetrapolar bioelectrical impedance method

to assess human body composition. J Appl Physiol. 1986; 60:1327-1332.

4. Lukaski HC. Biological indexes considered in the derivation of the bioelectrical impedance analysis. Am J

Clin Nutr. 1996; 64(Suppl):397-404.

5. Mattar JA and the Brazilian Group for Bioimpedance Study. Application of total body bioimpedance to the

critically ill patients. New Horiz. 1996; 4:493-502.

6. Barbosa-Silva MCG, Barros AJD, Wang J, Heymsfield SB, Pierson JrRN. Bioelectrical impedance analysis:

Population reference values for phase angle by age and sex. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005; 82:49-52.

7. Walker SP, Granthan–McGregor S, Powell C, Fletcher P, Himes JH. Bioelectric impedance, anthropometry

and body composition in stunted and non-stunted children. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1990;44: 763-768.

Page 9 of 16

311

Mangia, C. M. F., Carneluti, A., Kopelman, B. I., De-Carvalho, W. B., & Andrade, M. C. (2023). Repeatibility and Reproducibility (RR) of Bioelectric

Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(1). 303-318.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.111.13890

8. Fagundes U, Oliva CAG, Fagundes-Neto U. Evaluation of the nutritional status of Indian children from Alto

Xingu. Brazil. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2002;78(5):383-8.

9. Organización Mundial de la Salud. Medición del Cambio del Estado Nutricional. Directrices para Evaluar el

Efecto Nutricional de Programas de Alimentácion Suplementaria Destinados a Grupos Vulnerables, OMS,

Ginebra. 1983; 1-105.

10. Waterloo JC, Buzina R, Keller W, Lane JM, Nichaman MZ, Tanner JM. The presentation and use of height

and weight data for comparing the nutritional status of group of children under age of 10 years. Bull World

Health Organization. 1977;55: 489-498.

11. De Palo T, Messina G, Edefoni A, Perfumo F, Pisanello L, Peruzzi L, Di Iorio B, Mignozzi M, Vienna A, Conti G,

Penza R, Piccoli A. Normal values of the bioelectrical impedance vector in children and puberty. Nutrition.

2000; 16:417- 424.

12. Piccoli A, Fanos V, Peruzzi L, Schena S et al. Reference values of the bioelectrical impedance vector in

neonates in the first week after birth. Nutrition. 2002; 18:383-387.

13. National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Growth charts. Sept 9,

2010. [Last cited Aug 24,2020]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/who_charts.htm.

14. Lukaski HC. Requirements for clinical use of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). Ann New York Acad

Sci. 1999; 873:72-76.

15. Baumgartner RN, Chumlea WMC, Roche AF. Associations between bioelectric impedance and

anthropometric variables. Hum Biol. 1987; 59:235-244.

16. Siervogel RM, Woynarowska B, Chumlea C, Guo S and Roche AF. Bioelectrical Impedance Measures of Body

Composition: their relationship with level of blood pressure in young adults. Human Biol. 1987; 59:245-

255

17. US Food and Nutrition Board, National Academy os Sciences-National Research Council. Committee on

Nutrition Advisory to CDC.Comparision of body weights and lenghts or heights of group of children.

Nutrion Rev 1974;32(9): 284-8.

18. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Version 6. 4th ed. Vol 2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 1989. pp.846.

19. Bartlett JW and Frost C. Reliability, repeatability and reproducibility: analysis of measurement errors in

continuous variables. Ultrasound Obsttet Gynecol 2008; 31:466-473

20. Bai M, Susic D, O'Sullivan AJ, Henry A. Reproducibility of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis in Pregnancy

and the Association of Body Composition with the Risk of Gestational Diabetes: A Substudy of MUMS

Cohort. J Obes. 2020; 2020:3128767

21. Nagano M, Suita S, Yamanouchi T. The validity of bioelectrical impedance phase angle for nutritional

assessment in children.J Pediatr Surg 2000;35:1035-39

22. Fuller NJ, Ellia M. Potential use of bioelectrical impedance of the “whole body” and of body segments for

the assessment of body composition: Comparison with densitometry and anthropometry. Eur J Clin Nutr.

1989;43: 779-791.

23. Deuremberg P, Wetstarte JA, Hautvast JGAJ, van der Kooy K. Is the bioelectrical impedance method valid?

Am J Clin Nutr. 1991; 53:179-180.

Page 10 of 16

312

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 1, January-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

24. Organ LW, Bradhan GB, Gore DT, Lozier SL. Segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis: Theory and

application of a new technique. J Appl Physiol. 1994; 77:88-112.

25. Heymsfield SB, Wang ZM, Visser M et al. Techniques used in the measurement of body composition: An

overview with emphasis on bioelectrical impedance analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 1996;64(suppl): 478S-84S.

26. Gregory JW, Greene SA, Scrimgeour CM, Rennie MJ. Body water measurement in growth disorders: A

comparison of bioelectrical impedance and skinfold thickness techniques with isotope dilution. Arch Dis

Child. 1991; 66:220-222.

27. Baumgartener RN, Chumlea WC Roche AF. Bioelectric impedance phase angle and body composition. Am J

Clin Nutr 1988; 48:16-23

Page 11 of 16

313

Mangia, C. M. F., Carneluti, A., Kopelman, B. I., De-Carvalho, W. B., & Andrade, M. C. (2023). Repeatibility and Reproducibility (RR) of Bioelectric

Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(1). 303-318.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.111.13890

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of all children

Group Age (months) Height (cm) Weight (Kg) BMI R (Ohm) Xc (Ohm)

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

1 Both

gender*

10.3 4.6 71.3 6.3 8.7 1.9 8.71 1.85 801 96 51 8

2 M

(n=39)

51.7 13.6 106.6 10.9 18.4 4.0 16.02 1.35 750 64 63 9

F (n=37) 56 13.1 106.5 9.2 18.4 3.1 16.10 1.17 765 64 65 8

3 M

(n=94)

97 15.8 130.3 9.2 28.8 6.4 16.79 1.86 720 60 67 8

F (n=73) 98.8 15.8 131.5 10.6 29.8 7.8 16.92 2.12 750 75 67 8

Total M

(n=146)

76.48 31.96 1.19 0.20 24.35 8.45 16.67 1.72 729.53 62.98 64.21 9.28

F

(n=135)

70.13 37.18 1.12 0.28 23.95 14.79 16.63 1.80 770.56 81.78 63.61 9.98

Total n=281 73.42 34.65 1.16 0.23 23.5 9.46 16.65 1.75 749 75.26 63.92 9.6

Group 1 = 4 months < age < 23 months; Group 2 = 24 months < age < 71 months; Group 3 = 72 months < age < 123

months. Height, cm; Weight, Kg; R, resistance in ohm (W); Xc, reactance in ohm (W); SD, standard deviation

Fig. 1. Relationship between measured (white) and predicted (black) resistance

values according to age. The regression line predicted for the three age groups

studied were significantly different (p =0.003)

Page 12 of 16

314

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 1, January-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Fig. 2. Relationship between measured (white) and predicted (black) reactance

values according to age. The regression line predicted for the three age groups

studied were significantly different (p = 0.0065)

Table 2. Prediction of the resistance according to age, body

weight,body height for three study groups by age and genders

Group/sex N a0 a1 a2 r

2 SEE p

G1 Both 38 600.44a 10.86 ns -65.89c 0.41 75.39 0.0001

G 2 Male 39 636.82d 3.22 ns -12.63e 1.14 60.75 0.07

Female 37 608.83d 4.00 ns -14.73ns 0.11 62.71 0.14

G 3 Male 94 467.48d 3.96c -9.14d 0.29 51.37 0.0001

Female 73 268.46f 6.50d -12.54d 0.39 59.43 0.0001

R=a0 +a1*H+a2*W; R = resistance (ohm); H= Height (cm); W = weight (Kg); Group 1 = 4 months < age < 23 months;

Group 2 = 24 months < age < 71 months; Group 3 = 72 months < age < 123 months. ap<0.02; cp<0.002; dp<0.0001;

ep<0.05; fp<0.006. NS = non- significant

Page 13 of 16

315

Mangia, C. M. F., Carneluti, A., Kopelman, B. I., De-Carvalho, W. B., & Andrade, M. C. (2023). Repeatibility and Reproducibility (RR) of Bioelectric

Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(1). 303-318.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.111.13890

Table 3. Prediction of reactance according to age, body

weight, body height for three age study-groups and gender

Group Gender N b0 b1 b2 r

2 SEE p

1 Both 38 62.92a -0.24ns 0.60ns 0.008 7.43 0.87

2 Male 39 27.17ns 0.52ns -1.16ns 0.085 8.21 0.21

Female 37 13.15a 0.71 a -1.27ns 0.204 6.87 0.02

3 Male 94 50.73a 0.21ns -0.42ns 0.031 7.91 0.23

Female 73 44.12a 0.33ns -0.73a 0.147 7.16 0.0038

Xc= b0 + b1*H+b2*W; Xc = reactance (ohm); H= Height (cm); W = weight (Kg); Group 1 = 4 months < age < 23

months; Group 2 = 24 months < age < 71 months; Group 3 = 72 months < age < 123 months. ap<0.02; NS = non- significant

Table 4. Correlation of resistance and reactance with

body weight, body height for age study-groups and gender

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

Both genders Male Female Male Female

Resistance (Ohm)

Height (cm) -0.48a -0.22b -0.07b -0.22b -0.24c

Weight (Kg) -0.60a -0.30e -0.20b -0.44a -0.44a

Reactance (Ohm)

Height (cm) -0.07b 0.08b 0.46d -0.04b -0.04b

Weight (Kg) -0.05b -0.00b 0.32c -0.12b -0.12b

ap<0.001; b p= NS; c p<0.05; dp<0.005; ep<0.06.); Group 1 = 4 months < age < 23 months; Group 2 = 24 months <

age < 71 months; Group 3 = 72 months < age < 123 months

Table 5. Estimates and 95% tolerance intervals for

resistance and reactance for three age-study groups

Group Gender Mean Lower 95% TL Upper 95% TL

Resistance (Ohm)

1 Both 880 707 1053

2 Female 765 744 787

Male 748 728 769

3 Female 749 732 767

Male 721 708 733

Reactance (Ohm)

1 Both 51 48 54

2 Female 65 63 68

Male 63 60 66

3 Female 67 65 69

Male 67 65 68

Group 1 = 4 months < age < 23 months; Group 2 = 24 months < age < 71 months; Group 3 = 72 months < age < 123

months.

TL= tolerance limits; Lower 95% TL= lower limit; Upper 95% TL= TL upper limit. Mean

estimated value was calculated using the regression models presented in Tables 2 and 3.

Tolerance limit for the estimated mean were calculated with the expression:

^

__ 1

0 0 0 ( ) T T

y zs x x X X -

±

Page 14 of 16

316

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 1, January-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Where x0 = (W, H) in the estimated regression equation and X the model matrix. Z is the

corresponding normal distribution percentile and s the standard error estimate.

Table 6. Descriptive Statistics variables used to Repeatibility and Reprodutibility tests*

Statistic Bias Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Upper

AGE N 97 0 0 97 97

Minimum 72

Maximum 129

Mean 96 ,02 1,53 93,25 99,41

Std. Deviation 14,94 -,095 ,825 13,144 16,483

WEIGHT N 97 0 0 97 97

Minimum 18

Maximum 50

Mean 28,94 ,02 ,66 27,65 30,26

Std. Deviation 6,64 -,041 ,515 5,533 7,597

HEIGHT N 97 0 0 97 97

Minimum 112

Maximum 156

Mean 130,47 ,00 1,02 128,50 132,50

Std. Deviation 10,067 -,066 ,615 8,774 11,157

Reactance N 97 0 0 97 97

Minimum 49

Maximum 89

Mean 66 ,008725 ,830427 64,893907 68,065117

Std. Deviation 8,30 -

,0230436

,5734588 7,1403391 9,4329973

Resistance N 97 0 0 97 97

Minimum 559

Maximum 861

Mean 728 -,312203 5,834461 716,942716 739,973619

Std. Deviation 60 -

,6537916

4,1840605 52,0357470 68,6392850

Phase

Angle

N 97 0 0 97 97

Minimum 3,99

Maximum 6,07

Mean 5,211 ,002656 ,058331 5,107796 5,336438

Std. Deviation ,553 -

,0019695

,0362502 ,4855786 ,6255360

Valid N N 97 0 0 97 97

Age group from 72 months to 123 months (n=97)

Page 15 of 16

317

Mangia, C. M. F., Carneluti, A., Kopelman, B. I., De-Carvalho, W. B., & Andrade, M. C. (2023). Repeatibility and Reproducibility (RR) of Bioelectric

Impedance Vectors in Brazilian Children with Normal Body Mass. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(1). 303-318.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.111.13890

Fig3. Bland-Altman plots of differences of Reactance against mean of Reactance

Fig4. Bland-Altman plots of differences of Resistance against mean of Resistance

Page 16 of 16

318

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 1, January-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Fig 5. Bland-Altman plots of differences of Phase Angle against mean of Phase Angle