Hand-to-Foot Consumer-Grade Bioelectrical Impedance Shows Better Accuracy than a Foot-to-Foot Analyzer

Authors

Madison H. Sullivan, Texas Tech UniversityFollow
Ainsley Way, Texas Tech UniversityFollow
Carina M. Velasquez, Texas Tech UniversityFollow
Christine M. Florez, Texas Tech UniversityFollow
Julia Whitson, Texas Tech UniversityFollow
John Alexander, Texas Tech UniversityFollow
Adhirath Malladi, Texas Tech UniversityFollow
Grant M. Tinsley, Texas Tech UniversityFollow

Abstract

Multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA) is a widely available and noninvasive method used in body composition analysis. Tanita is a well-defined company that produces many MFBIA devices, ranging from consumer- to professional-grade. Tanita MFBIA devices use either hand-to-foot or foot-to-foot electrode arrangements, which may lead to different results for components such as body fat percentage (BFP). With MFBIA becoming more common and available, it is important to determine the accuracy of these different hardware configurations of MFBIA analyzers. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare two consumer-grade MFBIA devices differing in electrode arrangement to a laboratory-grade MFBIA analyzer from the same manufacturer. METHODS: Ninety-eight adults (63 F, 35 M) with a variety of ages (F: 32.5 ± 16.0 y; M: 24.5 ± 4.7 y) were measured using a laboratory-grade MFBIA hand-to-foot device (Tanita 980), a high-end consumer-grade MFBIA hand-to-foot device (Tanita BC-1500), and a consumer-grade MFBIA foot-to-foot device (Tanita RD-953 Pro). Both hand-to-foot devices use four electrodes to send electrical currents through the upper and lower parts of the body, while the foot-to-foot device uses two electrodes to send electrical currents primarily through the lower part of the body. Each device uses proprietary algorithms to estimate compositional components, and BFP values were extracted for the present analysis. Each consumer-grade device was compared to the professional analyzer using validity metrics (e.g., the coefficient of determination [R²)] and standard error of the estimate [SEE]) and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Overall, the Tanita BC-1500 consumer-grade hand-to-foot device showed better agreement with the Tanita 980 laboratory-grade hand-to-foot device (R²: 0.84, SEE: 3.14%, 95% limits of agreement: ±6.12%) compared to the Tanita RD-953 Pro consumer-grade foot-to-foot device (R²:0.72, SEE: 4.12%, 95% limits of agreement: ±8.42%). However, the BC-1500 exhibited a small amount of negative proportional bias (slope=-0.11), whereas the RD-953 Pro did not (slope=0.01). CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the hand-to-foot high-end consumer-grade Tanita BC-1500 device shows better accuracy when compared to the hand-to-foot laboratory-grade Tanita 980 device, with the foot-to-foot consumer-grade Tanita RD-953 Pro device showing lower agreement. When using these consumer-grade devices, the Tanita BC-1500 showed 3.14% error, while the Tanita RD-953 Pro showed 4.12% error. This information may be useful for individuals looking for a more affordable MFBIA option compared to the laboratory-grade devices when assessing BFP.

Recommended Citation

Sullivan, Madison H.; Way, Ainsley; Velasquez, Carina M.; Florez, Christine M.; Whitson, Julia; Alexander, John; Malladi, Adhirath; and Tinsley, Grant M. (2026) "Hand-to-Foot Consumer-Grade Bioelectrical Impedance Shows Better Accuracy than a Foot-to-Foot Analyzer," International Journal of Exercise Science: Conference Proceedings: Vol. 2: Iss. 18, Article 49.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijesab/vol2/iss18/49