Multicompartment body composition analysis in older adults: a cross-sectional study

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1835649/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Multicompartment body composition analysis in older adults: a cross-sectional study

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1835649/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 09 Feb, 2023

Read the published version in BMC Geriatrics →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background: During aging, changes occur in the proportions of muscle, fat, and bone. The body composition (BC) alterations have a great impact on health, quality of life, and functional capacity. Several equations to predict BC using anthropometric measurements have been developed from a bi-compartmental (2-C) approach that determines only fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM). However, these models have several limitations, when considering constant density, progressive bone demineralization, and changes in the hydration of the FFM, as typical changes during senescence. Thus, the main purpose of this study was to propose and validate a new multi-compartmental anthropometric model to predict fat, bone, and musculature components in older adults of both sexes.

Methods: This cross-sectional study included 100 older adults of both sexes. To determine the dependent variables (fat mass [FM], bone mineral content [BMC], and appendicular lean soft tissue [ALST]) whole total and regional DXA body scans were performed. Twenty-nine anthropometric measures and sex were appointed as independent variables. Models were developed through multivariate linear regression. Finally, the predicted residual error sum of squares (PRESS) statistic was used to measure the effectiveness of the predicted value for each dependent variable.

Results: An equation was developed to simultaneously predict FM, BMC, and ALST from only four variables: weight, half arm span (HAS), triceps skinfold (TriSK), and sex. This model showed high coefficients of determination and low estimation errors (FM: R²_adj: 0.83 and SEE: 3.16; BMC: R²_adj: 0.61 and SEE: 0.30; ALST: R²_adj: 0.85 and SEE: 1.65).

Conclusion: The equations provide a reliable, practical, and low-cost instrument to monitor changes in body components during the aging process. The internal cross-validation method PRESS presented sufficient reliability in the model as an inexpensive alternative for clinical field use.

aging

DXA

equation

fat mass

bone mineral content

ALST

Muscle, fat, and bone are three main components of interest in the body composition (BC) field (1). Aging processe involve proportional changes in these components (1) due to decreased levels of anabolic steroids and sex hormones (2). These alterations in the older adults’ BC have a great impact on their health and quality of life, expose them to the risk of malnutrition, and could lead to conditions of disability (3). Skeletal muscle mass (SMM) has various essential physiological functions in humans and its maintenance is important to keep the body healthy, especially during aging. Thus, the reduction of SMM impairs muscle strength, and functional capacity, increasing the chances of morbidity and mortality (4, 5). As result, diverse functional and metabolic disorders in older adults also can occur (6, 7). As a large proportion of SMM (≅ 74%) is found in the extremities and the main proportion of appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST) is SMM (≅ 76%) (8). So, the ALST is a representative measure of the SMM. In addition, ALST is used to identify sarcopenia (9), sarcopenic obesity (10), osteosarcopenia (11), and osteosarcopenic obesity (2). In turn, the bone mineral content (BMC) presents important variations throughout the olders’ life. Peak BMC occurs in the third decade of life and declines over the years (12). This reduction is similar in men and women before 50 years of age, but after this, the differences become very distinct against women because of menopause (13). This skeletal reduction restrains bone strength and can cause osteopenia and osteoporosis. The World Health Organization defines osteopenia and osteoporosis as a T score equal to or less than − 1 and − 2.5 standard deviations, respectively; below the peak bone mass of a young healthy cohort (12). Osteoporosis increases the risk of fractures and is an important health problem faced by older adults (14). Meanwhile, fat mass (FM) presents an increase during aging (15). From the 70 years old, the FM increases (7.5%) in a similar way for both sexes (16), becoming one of the main risk factors for chronic diseases (17), some types of cancer (18), physical disability (19) and mortality (20). In this sense, changes in ALST, BMC, and FM during senescence have a great impact on their health (21), quality of life, and functional capacity (22). Follow-ups and interventional studies are desirable at this stage of life (23). To monitor this BC variability, simple and low-cost methods are required (23).

Several equations to predict BC using anthropometric measurements have been developed to determine FM and fat-free mass (FFM). Body density (BD) is usually thereferential method for estimating body fat by hydrostatic weighing (24–28). However, these models have limitations regarding the estimation of older’s BD and BC (29). The traditional bi-compartmental (2-C) model is based on the assumption that there is a linear relationship between subcutaneous fat, total fat, and BD. However, the correlation between total and subcutaneous body fat decreases with age (30, 31). Perhaps it is due to; 1) the redistribution of FM from the extremities to the visceral area, and 2) due to fat infiltration in the SMM. Thus, there is an overestimation of the BD, and consequently, the FM is underestimated (32). Another worrying limitation is to assume a constant density of 0.9007 g/cm³ and 1.100 g/cm³ for the FM (33) and FFM (34), respectively. However, the natural aging process causes a progressive bone demineralization (35) and changes in the hydration of the FFM, causing a decrease in its density (36) which also affects the FM estimate (35, 36). Furthermore, these 2-C equations do not evaluate other components, such as ALST and BMC, fundamental components in vulnerable peoples (37) and older adults (38). Moreover, the ALST is a consensual parameter for SMM among agencies. It is equivalent to muscle tissue in arms and legs, except for a small amount of connective tissue and skin (39).

Since the methodological advances are necessary to analyze the BC in a more precise and detailed way, providing a broader understanding of the metabolic functions of each component (40). Among imaging analysis methods, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is widely used because its offers advantages such as low cost, speed of measurement (whole-body scans need less than 20 min), noninvasive, efficiency in the simultaneous determination of several components in a single scan (41), and their radiation exposure are considered small and safe for repeated measures (< 1 mrem for whole-body scans) (42). Furthermore, DXA is considered a 3-C model (43, 44), once it can accurately measure FM, BMC, and appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST) (45). ALST is mainly muscle (≅ 76%) (46, 47) and a large proportion (≅ 74%) of SMM is in the extremities (8). Thus, ALST is the strongest predictor of SMM (8) and is widely used in sarcopenia consensus (9, 48). However, BC assessment with sophisticated equipment such as DXA is restricted to specific professionals, requiring a specialized structure. Then, why anthropometric measurements are simple and with a low cost associated (49), their use has been presented as valid alternatives for estimating BC in a multicompartmental approach in children and adolescents of both sexes (50, 51), sarcopenia risks (39, 52) lipodystrophy of seropositive patients (37, 53) and muscle loses in older adults (54). Accordingly, this proposal may also be viable for older adults, as long as it is a practical, simple and non-invasive tool. So, the objective of this study was to propose and validate a multi-compartmental anthropometric model for the prediction of fat, bone, and musculature components in older adults of both sexes. Our hypothesis is that body composition can be estimated through anthropometric measurements.

Design and Study population

In this study, we adopted a cross-sectional design to develop and validate a multicomponent anthropometric model to simultaneously estimate LST, BMC, and FM. The study was conducted from October 2016 to May 2017. The study sample was derived from physically independent community-dwelling older adults in a city in southeastern Brazil. The inclusion criteria were: adults aged 60–85 years, of both sexes, who walk independently. The exclusion criteria were: the presence of diseases that restrict mobility or muscle strength; absence of unstable cardiovascular condition; acute infection; tumor; back pain; prostheses, individuals with a diagnosis of cancer or uncontrolled diseases, who presented sequel of stroke, experienced a weight loss more than three kilograms (kg) in the last 3 months, had a cognitive limitation that restricts understanding and taking tests, who did not complete all the stages or desired to withdraw from the study.

The study was approved by the Ethical Review Board of Hospital das Clinicas at the Medical School of the University of Sao Paulo (HC-FMRP/USP), following the ethical guidelines outlined in the 1975 Helsinki Declaration. Written informed consents were obtained from all individuals included in the study, after a brief explanation of the study objectives and evaluations. This manuscript followed the guidelines from The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) conference list, and the completed checklist is attached.

The sample size calculation was considered the desired maximum error (ε) and degree of confidence (Zy), previously knowing the population variability (σ²) (55). For this, we used the variable with the greatest variability (FM; SD = 8.7 kg) expected for such a population (56). Once the predetermined error estimate (ε ≤ 1.8 kg) and maximum desired error (5%) the ideal n for the study (55) was defined (n = 90).

Study protocol

A multidisciplinary health-trained team (nurses, nutritionists, pharmacists, physical education professors, physicians, and physiotherapists) performed data collection. All procedures, for each participant, were completed during one visit to the laboratories at the Hospital das Clinicas at the Medical School of the University of Sao Paulo at Ribeirao Preto (HCFMRP/USP). Participants came to the laboratory after an overnight fast (8h fast), abstaining from vigorous exercises, and no caffeine and alcohol during the preceding 24h. Before the measurements, the subjects were asked to empty their bladders. A total-body DXA scan was executed according to the manufacturer's guidelines. The anthropometric measures were taken according to the literature guidelines (57), whose procedures are summarized below.

The dependent variables

Whole and regional body composition were determined by DXA (Hologic® scanner, model QDR4500W; version 11.2, Bedford, MA). The DXA measurements included absolute values of appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST, kg), bone mineral content (BMC, kg), and fat mass (FM, kg), considered dependent variables. As the BMC represents the gray portion of bone, the bone adjustment was performed by multiplying the BMC by 1.0436 (58). The ALST was obtained through the sum of the lean soft tissue (LST) of the lower and upper limbs on both sides (59). The DXA measurements were electronically transferred to an external HD and organized into a general data sheet without manual typing.

The independent variables

The participant’s body mass and height were measured with a digital scale (Filizola® (model Personal, Campo Grande, MS) and a hall fixed stadiometer (Sanny® Professional – ES2020), respectively. The skinfolds (n = 09) were measured with Lange caliper with precision in mm, on the right side of the body in the regions. The circumferences (n = 08) were realized using inelastic and inextensible tape (Sanny®). The widths (n = 08) were measured with Pachymeter (Sanny®). In addition, knee height and half arm span (HAS) were measured using a Sanny® segmometer. All these procedures followed conventional standardization (60). The anthropometric measurements of our laboratory remain within the limits of reliability (51).

Statistical analysis

The basic analysis involved descriptive statistics using measures of central tendency to describe the characteristics of the sample. To verify the data normality, the Shapiro–Wilk test was applied. Comparisons between sex were performed using Student’s t-test for independent samples. For the Multicompartmental anthropometric equation development, we adopted previous procedures (50, 51), briefly described below.

Through the determination of 30 independent variables plus the sex for the prediction of the 3 dependent variables, the multivariate regression model (nYm = nX(r + 1) (r + 1) βm + nεm) by diagonal mutual analysis, parameter estimation, and the least squares errors method was used (61) by R Statistical Software (version 4.1.2, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). The criteria for selection and reduction of independent variables followed the following steps: a) factor analysis and model adequacy (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) and Sphericity test (Bartlett) were performed to verify the suitability of the sample; b) univariate linear regression to determine all common independent variables for each dependent variable (ALST, BMC, and FM), with significantly less than 5%; c) multivariate linear regression to estimate the parameters and Pillai approximation method for showing possible variables exclusions; d) testing of the remaining model (enter - univariate method), with estimated values of VIF (< 10.0) and multicollinearity (L < 1000) maximum permitted; e) adjustments by Pillai approach to testing the F values; f) as the variable sex is a categorical variable, it could not enter in the factor analysis. However, it will be added to the multivariate model due to its theoretical relevance and assumption of improving the model; g) then multivariate β parameters were determined, with the proposition of equations and residual distribution for each dependent variable; h) Akaike information criterion (AIC) statistic to ensure greater quality and simplicity of the statistical model. The details of the statistical procedures have been previously described in adolescents of both sexes (50, 51).

Finally, the predicted residual error sum of squares (PRESS) statistic was used to measure the effectiveness of the predicted equations for each dependent variable. The procedure may be understood as design efficiency in estimating the actual parameters by a virtual simulation that is, from the exclusion of an observation, equations are proposed with the remaining sample and replicated through cross-validation for each participant that was excluded. For validation, we follow the following steps: a) the correlation coefficients were estimated between predicted and measured values and b) cross-validation by PRESS method, coefficients of determination (Q²_PRESS), and error (S_PRESS) for each dependent variable (ALST, BMC, and FM) (61).

Table 1 shows anthropometric and body composition measures of the eligible participants. The means of all variables are within the confidence interval (95% CI), within the range limits for normal trends of distribution. Men were statistically taller, heavier, larger, and longer in most comparisons with women. Also had higher values of ALST, BMC, and residual mass. On other hand, women presented higher skinfolds, fat mass, and circumferences of hip and thigh values (p < 0.05).

Table 1

– Descriptive values of anthropometric and body composition variables in older adults, difference test by sex.
	Men (n = 31)					Women (n = 69)
	Mean (SD)	95% CI		Variance	Min - Max	Mean (SD)	95% CI		Variance	Min - Max	p
	Mean (SD)	IL	UL	Variance	Min - Max	Mean (SD)	IL	UL	Variance	Min - Max	p
Age (years)	72 (7.6)	69.2	74.8	57.8	60.0–88.0	69.8 (5.9)	68.4	71.3	35.4	60.0–85.0	0.133
Anthropometric variables
Height (cm)	168.0 (8.0)	165.0	170.9	64.0	150.5–188.0	156.2 (6.0)	154.8	157.6	35.4	145.0–174.0	< 0.001
Weight (kg)	71.7 (13.3)	66.9	76.6	177.8	42.0–108.0	65.8 (11.4)	63.0	68.5	130.9	39.0–102.0	0.022
Knee height (cm)	53.6 (2.6)	52.6	54.5	7.0	49.1–61.8	49.6 (2.1)	49.1	50.1	4.5	45.0–54.4	< 0.001
Half arm span (cm)	87.4 (4.7)	85.6	89.1	21.8	78.7–101.0	80.9 (3.7)	79.9	81.8	13.9	69.1–89.5	< 0.001
Skinfold
Subscapular skinfold (mm)	23.2 (8.5)	20.0	26.3	72.3	6.0–37.0	28.3 (8.8)	26.2	30.4	77.0	8.0–47.0	0.007
Triceps skinfold (mm)	15.1 (5.8)	13.0	17.3	34.0	4.0–26.0	25.8 (6.9)	24.2	27.5	48.0	9.0–46.0	< 0.001
Biceps skinfold (mm)	8.1 (3.5)	6.8	9.4	12.2	3.0–15.0	15.2 (5.3)	13.9	16.5	28.6	5.0–34.0	< 0.001
Media axillary skinfold (mm)	18.5 (7.6)	15.8	21.3	57.4	4.0–30.0	23.7 (6.8)	22.1	25.4	46.5	5.0–41.0	0.001
Pectoral skinfold (mm)	16.9 (5.4)	15.0	18.9	28.9	4.0–26.0	14.7 (6.4)	13.2	16.2	40.5	4.0–40.0	0.094
Suprailiac skinfold (mm)	19.7 (9.8)	16.1	23.3	95.5	5.0–39.0	29.3 (7.9)	27.4	31.2	63.0	8.0–50.0	< 0.001
Vertical abdominal skinfold (mm)	25.9 (8.3)	22.8	28.9	68.5	5.0–39.0	33.6 (8.6)	31.6	35.7	74.5	6.0–55.0	< 0.001
Media Thigh skinfold (mm)	18.1 (7.5)	15.4	20.9	56.0	5.0–40.0	32.2 (11)	29.6	34.8	120.1	9.0–65.0	< 0.001
Calf skinfold (mm)	11.9 (6.4)	9.5	14.3	41.4	2.0–34.0	23.8 (7.4)	22.0	25.6	55.2	6.0–45.0	< 0.001
Circumference
Chest circumference (cm)	97.8 (9.2)	94.4	101.1	84.5	82.0–116.5	92.9 (7.6)	91.1	94.8	58.2	72.0–115.5	0.007
Arm circumference (cm)	28.8 (3.5)	27.6	30.1	12.0	20.0–36.0	29.9 (3.8)	29.0	30.8	14.1	22.0–40.8	0.178
Forearm circumference (cm)	26.0 (2.0)	25.2	26.7	3.8	20.0–30.0	23.8 (2.3)	23.3	24.4	5.1	19.0–30.0	< 0.001
Waist circumference (cm)	92.2 (11.1)	88.1	96.2	122.8	68.5–115.0	86.2 (10.0)	83.8	88.6	100.6	65.0–113.0	0.009
Abdominal circumference (cm)	96.1 (10.9)	92.1	100.1	118.5	68.0–115.5	95.4 (10.9)	92.8	98.0	119.7	70.0–120.0	0.766
Hip circumference (cm)	96.8 (6.6)	94.4	99.2	43.1	80.0–111.5	100.6 (9.0)	98.5	102.8	81.7	81.5–128.0	0.038
Medial thigh circumference (cm)	47.1 (5.6)	45.1	49.2	31.7	32.0–57.0	52.8 (6.3)	51.3	54.3	40.3	37.5–69.0	< 0.001
Calf circumference (cm)	35.6 (3.5)	34.3	36.9	12.1	26.5–42.5	34.9 (3.0)	34.2	35.6	8.7	25.2–42.0	0.268
Girth
Bi-acromial breadth (cm)	39.9 (2.7)	38.9	40.9	7.1	33.6–44.1	37 (2.0)	36.6	37.5	4.1	32.9–45.0	< 0.001
Bi-iliac breadth (cm)	31.3 (2.6)	30.3	32.3	6.9	28.1–39.8	30.8 (2.1)	30.2	31.3	4.3	26.2–37.0	0.268
Bi-trochanteric breadth (cm)	33.8 (1.7)	33.2	34.5	2.9	31.4–39.7	33.3 (2.3)	32.8	33.9	5.2	28.7–39.9	0.289
Bi-maleolar breadth (cm)	7.0 (0.5)	6.8	7.2	0.3	6.0–8.2	6.3 (0.4)	6.2	6.4	0.1	5.4–7.4	< 0.001
Biepicondylar humerus breadth (cm)	6.7 (0.5)	6.5	6.9	0.2	5.7–7.7	5.8 (0.5)	5.7	5.9	0.2	4.8–6.8	< 0.001
Bi-styloid breadth (cm)	5.7 (0.4)	5.6	5.9	0.2	5.2–6.8	5.1 (0.4)	4.9	5.2	0.1	4.4–6.4	< 0.001
Biepicondylar femur breadth (cm)	9.7 (0.7)	9.5	9.9	0.4	7.9–11.6	9.4 (0.8)	9.2	9.6	0.6	8.0–12.4	0.062
Transverse thoracic breadth (cm)	30.8 (2.6)	29.9	31.8	6.6	24.9–36.7	27.7 (1.8)	27.3	28.2	3.3	22.3–31.4	< 0.001
Body composition
ALST (kg)	20.7 (4.1)	19.2	22.2	16.5	12.6–32.5	14.6 (2.6)	14.0	15.2	6.5	9.2–22.5	< 0.001
Fat mass (kg)	21.7 (6.9)	19.2	24.2	47.4	7.7–33.6	27.9 (7.2)	26.1	29.6	51.7	13.6–47.9	< 0.001
Bone mineral content	2.6 (0.6)	2.3	2.8	0.3	1.4–3.8	2.0 (0.3)	1.9	2.1	0.1	1.4–3.1	< 0.001
Residual mass	22.8 (3.9)	21.4	24.2	15.1	15.8–36.2	18.5 (2.8)	17.8	19.2	8.1	12.7–27.7	< 0.001
CI: confidence interval; SD: standard deviation; UL: upper limit; IL: inferior limit; Min-Max: minimum-maximum; ALST: appendicular lean soft tissue.

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test showed the sample adequacy and resulted in a value of 0.885, classified as meritorious (62) and the Barlett sphericity test yielded a Χ² of 3368.04 (p < 0.001), indicating homogeneous variance between groups. From the univariate regression (stepwise), the number of remaining variables to ALST (n = 08), FM (n = 05) and BMC (n = 06) showed high r²_adj (0.68 to 0.88) for the independent common variables for the three dependents variables (Table 2). In bold, variables with statistically significant coefficients (p < 0.05), common in at least two of the dependent variables are shown.

Table 2

Univariate regression for selecting common independent variables at least twice (bold).
Appendicular lean soft tissue			Fat mass				Bone mineral content
Variables	Coefficient	p	Variables	Coefficient		p	Variables	Coefficient	p
Pectoral skinfold (mm)	0.13018	< 0.001	Media axillary skinfold (mm)	0.16083	0.012		Bi-styloid breadth (cm)	0.210010	0.020
Weight (kg)	0.13214	< 0.001	Pectoral skinfold (mm)	-0.24240	< 0.001		Waist circumference (cm)	-0.030637	0.001
Knee height (cm)	0.23779	0.009	Media thigh skinfold (mm)	0.12626	0.008		Triceps skinfold (mm)	-0.020330	0.001
Bi-acromial breadth (cm)	0.30532	0.001	Weight (kg)	0.35620	< 0.001		Weight (kg)	0.038668	< 0.001
Biepicondylar humerus breadth (cm)	1.22979	< 0.001	Half arm span (cm)	-0.29770	0.002		Half arm span (cm)	0.032912	0.005
Calf circumference (cm)	0.26318	0.001					Medial thigh circumference (cm)	-0.028782	0.001
Media thigh skinfold (mm)	-0.07881	< 0.001
Triceps skinfold (mm)	-0.09662	0.003
R² = 0.88			R² = 0.85				R² = 0.68
R²: coefficient of determination.

Next, a multivariate linear regression model was developed, simultaneously for the three dependent variables from variables selected in the univariate models. The categorical sex variable has not been previously tested in the models; however, it was added to the multivariate procedure due to its theoretical relevance, as demonstrated by their significant comparisons in Table 1. The coefficients, variance inflation factor (VIF), Pillai’s trace, and precision and cross-validation results are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Coefficients, precision, and validation of a multicomponent anthropometric model to estimate body composition in older adults.

	Appendicular lean soft tissue	Fat mass	Bone mineral content	VIF	F	p (Pillai's trace)
Coefficients
Intercept	-10.21376	17.85412	-1.21230
Weight	0.19336	0.50239	0.01912	2.045	676.33	< 0.001
Half arm span	0.20139	-0.40498	0.02944	2.049	9.53	< 0.001
Triceps skinfold	-0.04796	0.17292	-0.01267	2.544	4.17	0.008
Sex	-3.16675	4.73524	-0.13021	2.407	11.33	< 0.001
Precision
R²	0.85	0.83	0.62
R²_adjusted	0.85	0.83	0.61
SEE	1.65	3.16	0.30
Cross-validation
PRESS	287.00	1066.84	9.75
Q²_PRESS	0.84	0.81	0.58
SEE_PRESS	0.18	0.34	0.03
R²: coefficient of determination; R²_adjusted: adjusted coefficient of determination; SEE: standard error to estimate; PRESS: sum of squares of
residuals; Q²_PRESS: press coefficient of determination; SEE_PRESS: press standard error of estimate; VIF: variance inflation factor; Sex: male = 0; female = 1.

Higher precision and cross-validation values of PRESS, Q²_PRESS, and low SEE_PRESS were found for each dependent variable (Table 3). These results showed that the models are valid to simultaneously predict ALST, FM, and BMC, with accordance close to “1” (Q²_PRESS) and error close to “0” (S_PRESS).

The model standardized residuals are normally distributed (p = 0.099) according to Fig. 1.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that proposes a valid anthropometric model to simultaneously estimate FM, ALST, and BMC in older adults from a multicompartmental approach. DXA was used as a reference method due to its advantages in estimating all components by a single scan (63). Our proposed model with three anthropometric variables plus sex showed high prediction coefficients and low errors to simultaneously predict ALST, FM, and BMC. Since the BC is affected by sex (64), and changes in BC due to aging occur differently between men and women (65), the inclusion of the variable sex was made arbitrarily in the models generated in this study. Therefore, the current prediction equations are useful for estimating and monitoring ALST, FM, and BMC in older adults of both sexes.

Current anthropometric models to estimate BC in older adults have several limitations, causing errors in the estimation of BC. Furthermore, they have been developed using a bi-compartmental model (2-C) that determines FM and FFM (27, 28, 66), and this model is based on there is a linear relationship between subcutaneous fat, total fat, and BD. However, this is not true, because during the aging process there is age-related adipose tissue redistribution that is, an accumulation of visceral and abdominal fat occurs (67). Additionally, these equations do not evaluate ALST and BMC which are components that change during aging. The Lean equations (68) to estimate % body fat showed a coefficient of determination (r²) of 0.77 and 0.70 and standard error of estimate (SEE) of 4.1% and 4.7% for older adults men and women, respectively. However, our results for FM determination showed higher coefficient of determination (r² = 0.83) and lower errors (SEE = 3,16 kg).

Progressive and metabolically unfavorable changes in BC have long been observed with aging (69). In a prospective study that investigated age-dependent changes over two decades, the main results found were an increase in BM, BMI, and FM until the age of approximately 70 and 75 years, after these parameters start to decrease (70). Regarding the changes in the SMM, the studies have shown a greater reduction in men than in women, with a more accentuated decline between 70 and 79 years old in both sexes (56, 69). However, the pattern and rate of age-related changes in BC may vary by sex, ethnicity, physical activity level, and caloric intake (71).

DXA is the most popular technique for measuring BC (42) and it has shown to be a reliable method of FFM during aging (72). Furthermore, DXA may be considered the current reference technique for assessing SMM and BC in research and clinical practice (42). A high correlation (r = 0.97) between DXA-measured ALST and SMM measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was reported for both men and women (18–92 years) (8). In the same way, DXA-derived LST was found to be significantly correlated with MRI-measured SMM (r = 0.94; p ≤ 0.001) in older women (73). In comparisons between DXA-measured FM and MRI-measured adipose tissue the associations were also high and significant ( r = 0.99; p ≤ 0.001) for older women (73). The principle of DXA depends on the property of X-rays to be attenuated in proportion to the composition and depth of the material the beam is crossed. The DXA scanner emits two different energy beams (40 and 70 keV). From the number of photons that are transmitted concerning the number detected the quantity of BMC and soft tissue (fat and FFM) can be determined (42). Therefore, DXA can be used as a reference method to propose equations using anthropometry for clinical and professional practice (74). The anthropometric measurements are performed in both the geriatric nutritional assessment and epidemiological studies because they are painless, safe, non-invasive, simple, and low-cost procedures, which permit the estimation of the body components and also the calculation of nutritional indicators using predictive equations (32). The main anthropometric measurements used in the older adults for this purpose are weight, height, the calf and waist circumferences, as well as the triceps, biceps, subscapular and suprailiac skinfolds (32).

The current investigation has several strengths. As far as we know, this is the first study that proposes equations to estimate the main components of BC from the same anthropometric variables for older adults. This implies a reduction in the prediction error and facilitates its use in epidemiological studies. Another positive point is that we included the variable sex in the generated models, facilitating the application in large groups of both sexes. Despite all the research efforts in this study, there were still some limitations: for example, DXA is not a gold standard for older adults’ body composition. However, the current state-of-the-art method for body composition measurement in the four compartments model (4-C models) at the molecular level, as it includes the evaluation of the main FFM components, thus reducing the effect of biological variability. Nonetheless, it requires sophisticated and highly specialized technical equipment; it implies the propagation of measurement errors, difficult to apply in certain population groups, and is time-consuming. Furthermore, it has high costs, making it difficult to use on large samples (75). Nevertheless, DXA represents a reference method for the assessment of human BC in the research field (63, 76) and it is widely considered the gold standard for BC assessment in clinical practice because of its advantages (74). Moreover, reference values of BC assessed by DXA on adults over 60 years old are available from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2004 and other studies on the local population (77). Although it is a program designed to assess the health of adults and children in the United States, these reference values should be helpful in the evaluation of a variety of adult abnormalities involving fat, LST, and bone.

As it was hypothesized, using a multivariate regression model, simple anthropometric measures can be used to simultaneously estimate body components (ALST, FM, and BMC) in older adults of both sexes. As a practical simulation, an older adult male “A” with measurements of weight (66.3 kg), HAS (80.5 cm), TrSk (16 mm), and sex (0), when applied to our model, would have the estimated values of 18.1 kg, 21.3 kg and 2.2 kg for ALST, FM, and BMC, respectively. Their true measured values (DXA) were 18.2 kg, 20.8 kg, and 2.2 kg. If the equation is applied to an older adult woman “B” with values of weight (58.6 kg), HAS (81.5 cm), TriSK (26 mm), and sex (1) the estimated values for ALST, FM, and BMC would be: 13.1 kg, 23.5 kg and 1.9 kg, correspondingly. As noted, the values are close to the measured DXA values for ALST (13.2 kg), FM (23.4 kg), and BMC (2.0 kg). These values can be compared with the reference values National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (77) and be useful for many applications in clinical and field practice. For example, using the criteria proposed by the FNIH (cutoffs < 19.75 for men and < 15.02 for women) we can classify both older adults with sarcopenia (78). Since older adult “A” presented predicted ALST values of 18.1 kg and older adult B of 13.1 kg. These findings are highly relevant as they allow permanent following/monitoring of excessive accumulation of FM, declines in BMC and ALST, as risks to older adults throughout the life course (79, 80). Thus, keeping the balance rate of fat, muscle and bone are essential to preserving metabolic homeostasis, and health status and positively contributes to successful aging (74). For this reason, the assessment of BC in older adults is critical and could be an additional preventive strategy for age-related diseases (74), which may result in sarcopenia (9, 48, 81), osteoporosis (14) sarcopenic obesity (64) osteosarcopenic obesity (2) and osteosarcopenia (11). This should impair muscle strength, and functional capacity, as well as greater morbidity and mortality in older adults (4, 5). Therefore, the current prediction equations could increase the available options for the estimation of body composition in older adults. To ensure dissemination and accessibility, an assessment of the main body components based on our predictive models can be found in an excel file (Additional file 1) in the following link (http://posgraduacao.eerp.usp.br/files/Model_BodyComposition_OlderAdults.xlsx). Lastly, future studies should evaluate the efficiency of these equations applied in longitudinal and intervention studies.

Our findings demonstrated that the anthropometric prediction equations developed in this study provide a reliable, practical, and low-cost instrument to assess the components that most change during the aging process. These results suggest that the equations can be valid alternative and reliable information about BC in older adults since the internal validation method PRESS presented high internal validity, high coefficients of determination, and low prediction errors.

Body composition (BC)

Skeletal muscle mass (SMM)

Fat mass (FM)

Fat-free mass (FFM)

Bone mineral content (BMC)

Lean soft tissue (LST)

Appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST)

Predicted residual error sum of squares (PRESS)

Half arm span (HAS)

Triceps skinfold (TriSK)

Standard error to estimate (SEE)

Body density (BD)

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The study was approved by the Ethics Review Board at University Hospital, the University of São Paulo at Ribeirão Preto College of Nursing (EERP/USP), Brazil, with CAAE number: 18416619.3.0000.5393, and written informed consent was obtained from all subjects. All methods were carried out following the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001. This study was supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq-Brazil) under Grant 142078/2019-0.

Author’s contributions

ACRV: Conceptualization; data curation; formal analysis; methodology; writing-original draft. LV: formal analysis; methodology; PPA: Data curation; formal analysis; writing-original draft. APS: Data curation; formal analysis; writing-original draft. MFTJ: Data curation; formal analysis; writing-original draft. LSLS: Data curation; formal analysis; writing-original draft. TCA: Data curation; formal analysis; writing-original draft. EF: Supervision; writing reviews and editing. JLGS: Supervision; writing reviews and editing. VRP: Supervision; writing reviews and editing. JM: Supervision; writing reviews and editing. DRLM: Conceptualization; supervision; writing-review and editing.

Acknowledgments

Jorge Mota, Jose Luis Garcia-Soidan e Vicente Romo-Perez were supported by IACObus-2021-2022 program.

Jiang Y, Zhang Y, Jin M, Gu Z, Pei Y, Meng P. Aged-Related Changes in Body Composition and Association between Body Composition with Bone Mass Density by Body Mass Index in Chinese Han Men over 50-year-old. PLoS One. 2015 Jun 19;10(6):e0130400. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130400
Banitalebi E, Ghahfarrokhi MM, Dehghan M. Effect of 12-weeks elastic band resistance training on MyomiRs and osteoporosis markers in elderly women with Osteosarcopenic obesity: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Geriatr. 2021 Jul 20;21(1):433. doi: 10.1186/s12877-021-02374-9.
Genton L, Karsegard VL, Chevalley T, Kossovsky MP, Darmon P, Pichard C. Body composition changes over 9 years in healthy elderly subjects and impact of physical activity. Clin Nutr. 2011 Aug;30(4):436–42. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2011.01.009.
Francis P, Lyons M, Piasecki M, Mc Phee J, Hind K, Jakeman P. Measurement of muscle health in aging. Biogerontology. 2017 Dec;18(6):901–911. doi: 10.1007/s10522-017-9697-5.
Peterson SJ, Braunschweig CA. Prevalence of Sarcopenia and Associated Outcomes in the Clinical Setting. Nutr Clin Pract. 2016 Feb;31(1):40–8. doi: 10.1177/0884533615622537.
Kim JH, Lim S, Choi SH, Kim KM, Yoon JW, Kim KW, Lim JY, Park KS, Jang HC. Sarcopenia: an independent predictor of mortality in community-dwelling older Korean men. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2014 Oct;69(10):1244–52. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glu050.
Lim S, Kim JH, Yoon JW, Kang SM, Choi SH, Park YJ, Kim KW, Lim JY, Park KS, Jang HC. Sarcopenic obesity: prevalence and association with metabolic syndrome in the Korean Longitudinal Study on Health and Aging (KLoSHA). Diabetes Care. 2010 Jul;33(7):1652–4. doi: 10.2337/dc10-0107.
Kim J, Wang Z, Heymsfield SB, Baumgartner RN, Gallagher D. Total-body skeletal muscle mass: estimation by a new dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry method. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002 Aug;76(2):378–83. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/76.2.378.
Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Bahat G, Bauer J, Boirie Y, Bruyère O, Cederholm T, et al. Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on defnition and diagnosis. Age Ageing. 2018;48:16–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afy169.
Batsis JA, Mackenzie TA, Lopez-Jimenez F, Bartels SJ. Sarcopenia, sarcopenic obesity, and functional impairments in older adults: National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 1999–2004. Nutr Res. 2015 Dec;35(12):1031–9. doi: 10.1016/j.nutres.2015.09.003.
Kirk B, Zanker J, Duque G. Osteosarcopenia: epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment-facts and numbers. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2020 Jun;11(3):609–618. doi: 10.1002/jcsm.12567.
Kirk B, Al Saedi A, Duque G. Osteosarcopenia: A case of geroscience. Aging Med (Milton). 2019 Sep 8;2(3):147–156. doi: 10.1002/agm2.12080.
Blunt BA, Klauber MR, Barrett-Connor EL, Edelstein SL. Sex differences in bone mineral density in 1653 men and women in the sixth through tenth decades of life: the Rancho Bernardo Study. J Bone Miner Res. 1994 Sep;9(9):1333–8. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.5650090903.
Jones AR, Herath M, Ebeling PR, Teede H, Vincent AJ. Models of care for osteoporosis: A systematic scoping review of efficacy and implementation characteristics. EClinicalMedicine. 2021 Jul 14;38:101022. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101022.
Schweitzer L, Geisler C, Johannsen M, Glüer CC, Müller MJ. Associations between body composition, physical capabilities and pulmonary function in healthy older adults. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2017 Mar;71(3):389–394. doi: 10.1038/ejcn.2016.146.
Hughes VA, Frontera WR, Roubenoff R, Evans WJ, Singh MA. Longitudinal changes in body composition in older men and women: role of body weight change and physical activity. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002 Aug;76(2):473–81. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/76.2.473.
Hughes VA, Roubenoff R, Wood M, Frontera WR, Evans WJ, Fiatarone Singh MA. Anthropometric assessment of 10-y changes in body composition in the elderly. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Aug;80(2):475–82. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/80.2.475.
Chang SH, Beason TS, Hunleth JM, Colditz GA. A systematic review of body fat distribution and mortality in older people. Maturitas. 2012 Jul;72(3):175–91. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2012.04.004.
Zamboni M, Mazzali G. Obesity in the elderly: an emerging health issue. Int J Obes (Lond). 2012 Sep;36(9):1151–2. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2012.120.
Mraz M, Haluzik M. The role of adipose tissue immune cells in obesity and low-grade inflammation. J Endocrinol. 2014 Sep;222(3):R113-27. doi: 10.1530/JOE-14-0283.
Woodrow G. Body composition analysis techniques in the aged adult: indications and limitations. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2009 Jan;12(1):8–14. doi: 10.1097/MCO.0b013e32831b9c5b.
Fantin F, Di Francesco V, Fontana G, Zivelonghi A, Bissoli L, Zoico E, Rossi A, Micciolo R, Bosello O, Zamboni M. Longitudinal body composition changes in old men and women: interrelationships with worsening disability. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007 Dec;62(12):1375–81. doi: 10.1093/gerona/62.12.1375.
Saarelainen J, Kiviniemi V, Kröger H, Tuppurainen M, Niskanen L, Jurvelin J, Honkanen R. Body mass index and bone loss among postmenopausal women: the 10-year follow-up of the OSTPRE cohort. J Bone Miner Metab. 2012 Mar;30(2):208–16. doi: 10.1007/s00774-011-0305-5.
Brozek J, Grande F, Anderson JT, Keys A. Densitometric analysis of body composition: revision of some quantitative assumptions. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1963 Sep 26;110:113–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1963.tb17079.x.
Durnin JV, Womersley J. Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness: measurements on 481 men and women aged from 16 to 72 years. Br J Nutr. 1974 Jul;32(1):77–97. doi: 10.1079/bjn19740060.
Siri WE. Body composition from fluid spaces and density: analysis of methods. In: Brozec J, Henschel A, editors. Techniques for Measuring Body Composition. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy od Sciences, Natural Resources Council; 1961. p. 223–4.
Tran ZV, Weltman A. Predicting body composition of men from girth measurements. Human biology. 1988;60(1):167–75.
Tran ZV, Weltman A. Generalized equation for predicting body density of women from girth measurements. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1989 Feb;21(1):101–4. doi: 10.1249/00005768-198902000-00018.
Baumgartner RN, Heymsfield SB, Lichtman S, Wang J, Pierson RN Jr. Body composition in elderly people: effect of criterion estimates on predictive equations. Am J Clin Nutr. 1991 Jun;53(6):1345–53. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/53.6.1345.
Chumlea WC, Baumgartner RN. Status of anthropometry and body composition data in elderly subjects. Am J Clin Nutr. 1989 Nov;50(5 Suppl):1158–66; discussion 1231-5. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/50.5.1158.
Chumlea WC, Roche AF, Steinbaugh ML. Estimating stature from knee height for persons 60 to 90 years of age. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1985 Feb;33(2):116–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1985.tb02276.x.
Camina Martín MA, de Mateo Silleras B, Redondo del Río MP. Body composition analysis in older adults with dementia. Anthropometry and bioelectrical impedance analysis: a critical review. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2014 Nov;68(11):1228–33. doi: 10.1038/ejcn.2014.168.
Fidanza F, Keys A, Anderson JT. Density of body fat in man and other mammals. J Appl Physiol. 1953 Oct;6(4):252–6. doi: 10.1152/jappl.1953.6.4.252.
van der Ploeg GE, Gunn SM, Withers RT, Modra AC. Use of anthropometric variables to predict relative body fat determined by a four-compartment body composition model. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2003 Aug;57(8):1009–16. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601636.
Kuk JL, Saunders TJ, Davidson LE, Ross R. Age-related changes in total and regional fat distribution. Ageing Res Rev. 2009 Oct;8(4):339–48. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2009.06.001.
Brodie D, Moscrip V, Hutcheon R. Body composition measurement: a review of hydrodensitometry, anthropometry, and impedance methods. Nutrition. 1998 Mar;14(3):296–310. doi: 10.1016/s0899-9007(97)00474-7.
Dos Santos AP, Navarro AM, Schwingel A, Alves TC, Abdalla PP, Venturini ACR, de Santana RC, Machado DRL. Lipodystrophy diagnosis in people living with HIV/AIDS: prediction and validation of sex-specific anthropometric models. BMC Public Health. 2018 Jun 27;18(1):806. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5707-z.
Abdalla PP, Carvalho ADS, Dos Santos AP, Venturini ACR, Alves TC, Mota J, Machado DRL. One-repetition submaximal protocol to measure knee extensor muscle strength among older adults with and without sarcopenia: a validation study. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2020 May 6;12:29. doi: 10.1186/s13102-020-00178-9. Erratum in: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2020 May 26;12:34.
Abdalla PP, Silva AM, Venturini ACR, Santos APD, Carvalho ADS, Siqueira VAAA, Gomide EB, Alves NMDC, Ferriolli E, Machado DRL. Cut-off points of appendicular lean soft tissue for identifying sarcopenia in older adults in Brazil: a cross-sectional study. Nutr Hosp. 2020 Apr 16;37(2):306–312. English. doi: 10.20960/nh.02951.
Müller MJ, Bosy-Westphal A, Heller M. 'Functional' body composition: differentiating between benign and non-benign obesity. F1000 Biol Rep. 2009 Oct 14;1:75. doi: 10.3410/B1-75.
Andreoli A, Garaci F, Cafarelli FP, Guglielmi G. Body composition in clinical practice. Eur J Radiol. 2016 Aug;85(8):1461–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.02.005.
Tosato M, Marzetti E, Cesari M, Savera G, Miller RR, Bernabei R, Landi F, Calvani R. Measurement of muscle mass in sarcopenia: from imaging to biochemical markers. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017 Feb;29(1):19–27. doi: 10.1007/s40520-016-0717-0.
Toomey C, Cremona A, Hughes K, Norton C, Jakeman PA. Review of Body Composition Measurement in the Assessment of Health. 2015; 16–32 p. doi: 10.1097/TIN.0000000000000017
Venturini ACR, Silva AM, Abdalla PP, Dos Santos AP, Borges FG, Alves TC, Siqueira VAAA, da Cruz Alves NM, Ferriolli E, Coelho EB, Duncan M, Mota J, Machado DRL. Estimating resting energy expenditure from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: A cross-sectional study in healthy young adults. Am J Hum Biol. 2021 Mar;33(2):e23466. doi: 10.1002/ajhb.23466.
Kaminsky LA, Ozemek C, Williams KL, Byun W. Precision of total and regional body fat estimates from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometer measurements. J Nutr Health Aging. 2014;18(6):591–4. doi: 10.1007/s12603-014-0012-8.
Heymsfield SB, Wang Z, Baumgartner RN, Ross R. Human body composition: advances in models and methods. Annu Rev Nutr. 1997;17:527–58. doi: 10.1146/annurev.nutr.17.1.527.
Lee RC, Wang Z, Heo M, Ross R, Janssen I, Heymsfield SB. Total-body skeletal muscle mass: development and cross-validation of anthropometric prediction models. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 Sep;72(3):796–803. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/72.3.796. Erratum in: Am J Clin Nutr 2001 May;73(5):995.
Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y, Cederholm T, Landi F, Martin FC, Michel JP, Rolland Y, Schneider SM, Topinková E, Vandewoude M, Zamboni M; European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: Report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. Age Ageing. 2010 Jul;39(4):412–23. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afq034.
da Cunha de Sá-Caputo D, Sonza A, Coelho-Oliveira AC, Pessanha-Freitas J, Reis AS, Francisca-Santos A, et al. Evaluation of the Relationships between Simple Anthropometric Measures and Bioelectrical Impedance Assessment Variables with Multivariate Linear Regression Models to Estimate Body Composition and Fat Distribution in Adults: Preliminary Results. Biology (Basel). 2021 Nov 19;10(11):1209. doi: 10.3390/biology10111209.
Machado D, Oikawa S, Barbanti V. The multicomponent anthropometric model for assessing body composition in a male pediatric population: a simultaneous prediction of fat mass, bone mineral content, and lean soft tissue. J Obes. 2013;2013:428135. doi: 10.1155/2013/428135.
Machado D, Silva A, Gobbo L, Elias P, de Paula FJA, Ramos N. Anthropometric multicompartmental model to predict body composition In Brazilian girls. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2017 Dec 21;9:23. doi: 10.1186/s13102-017-0088-7.
Abdalla PP, Dos Santos Carvalho A, Dos Santos AP, Venturini ACR, Alves TC, Mota J, et al. Cut-off points of knee extension strength allometrically adjusted to identify sarcopenia risk in older adults: A cross-sectional study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2020 Jul-Aug;89:104100. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2020.104100.
Santos APD, Machado DRL, Schwingel A, Chodzko-Zajko WJ, Alves TC, Abdalla PP, et al. Anthropometric cutoff points to identify lipodystrophy characteristics in people living with HIV/AIDS: an observational study. Nutr Hosp. 2019 Dec 26;36(6):1315–1323. English. doi: 10.20960/nh.02715.
Abdalla PP, Venturini ACR, Santos APD, Tasinafo Junior MF, Marini JAG, Alves TC, et al. Normalizing calf circumference to identify low skeletal muscle mass in older women: a cross-sectional study. Nutr Hosp. 2021 Jul 29;38(4):729–735. English. doi: 10.20960/nh.03572.
Bolfarine H, Bussab WdO. Elementos de amostragem. São Paulo: Edgard Blücher 2005.
Visser M, Pahor M, Tylavsky F, Kritchevsky SB, Cauley JA, Newman AB, et al. One- and two-year change in body composition as measured by DXA in a population-based cohort of older men and women. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2003 Jun;94(6):2368-74. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00124.2002.
Lohman T, Roche A, Martorell R. Anthropometric standardization reference manual. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1988.
Ballor DL. Exercise Training and Body Composition Changes. In: Lohman TG, editor. Human Body Composition. Champaign: Human Kinetics Publishers; 1996.
Venturini ACR, Abdalla PP, Santos APD, Alves TC, Carvalho ADS, Mota J, et al. Population specificity affects prediction of appendicular lean tissues for diagnosed sarcopenia: a cross-sectional study. Nutr Hosp. 2020 Aug 27;37(4):776–785. English. doi: 10.20960/nh.02929.
Lohman TG, Roche AF, Martorell R. Anthropometric standardization reference manual: Human Kinetics Books; 1988.
Johnson RA, Wichern DW. Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. New York: Prentice Hall; 1992.
Hutcheson GDS, N. The multivariate social scientist: Introductory statistics using generalized linear models. London: Sage Publications; 1999.
Guglielmi G, Ponti F, Agostini M, Amadori M, Battista G, Bazzocchi A. The role of DXA in sarcopenia. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2016 Dec;28(6):1047–1060. doi: 10.1007/s40520-016-0589-3.
Donini LM, Busetto L, Bauer JM, Bischoff S, Boirie Y, Cederholm T, et al. Critical appraisal of definitions and diagnostic criteria for sarcopenic obesity based on a systematic review. Clin Nutr. 2020 Aug;39(8):2368–2388. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2019.11.024.
Kim KM, Lim S, Oh TJ, Moon JH, Choi SH, Lim JY, et al. Longitudinal Changes in Muscle Mass and Strength, and Bone Mass in Older Adults: Gender-Specific Associations Between Muscle and Bone Losses. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2018 Jul 9;73(8):1062–1069. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glx188.
Durnin JV, Womersley J. Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness: measurements on 481 men and women aged from 16 to 72 years. Br J Nutr. 1974 Jul;32(1):77–97. doi: 10.1079/bjn19740060.
Yu PC, Hsu CC, Lee WJ, Liang CK, Chou MY, Lin MH, et al. Muscle-to-fat ratio identifies functional impairments and cardiometabolic risk and predicts outcomes: biomarkers of sarcopenic obesity. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2022 Feb;13(1):368–376. doi: 10.1002/jcsm.12877.
Lean ME, Han TS, Deurenberg P. Predicting body composition by densitometry from simple anthropometric measurements. Am J Clin Nutr. 1996 Jan;63(1):4–14. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/63.1.4.
Koster A, Visser M, Simonsick EM, Yu B, Allison DB, Newman AB, et al. Association between fitness and changes in body composition and muscle strength. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010 Feb;58(2):219–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02681.x.
Jungert A, Eichner G, Neuhäuser-Berthold M. Trajectories of Body Composition during Advanced Aging in Consideration of Diet and Physical Activity: A 20-Year Longitudinal Study. Nutrients. 2020 Nov 25;12(12):3626. doi: 10.3390/nu12123626.
Al-Sofiani ME, Ganji SS, Kalyani RR. Body composition changes in diabetes and aging. J Diabetes Complications. 2019 Jun;33(6):451–459. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2019.03.007.
Lustgarten MS, Fielding RA. Assessment of analytical methods used to measure changes in body composition in the elderly and recommendations for their use in phase II clinical trials. J Nutr Health Aging. 2011 May;15(5):368–75. doi: 10.1007/s12603-011-0049-x.
Chen Z, Wang Z, Lohman T, Heymsfield SB, Outwater E, Nicholas JS, et al. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is a valid tool for assessing skeletal muscle mass in older women. J Nutr. 2007 Dec;137(12):2775–80. doi: 10.1093/jn/137.12.2775.
Ponti F, Santoro A, Mercatelli D, Gasperini C, Conte M, Martucci M, et al. Aging and Imaging Assessment of Body Composition: From Fat to Facts. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2020 Jan 14;10:861. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2019.00861.
Heymsfield SB, Ebbeling CB, Zheng J, Pietrobelli A, Strauss BJ, Silva AM, et al. Multi-component molecular-level body composition reference methods: evolving concepts and future directions. Obes Rev. 2015 Apr;16(4):282–94. doi: 10.1111/obr.12261.
Bazzocchi A, Diano D, Ponti F, Andreone A, Sassi C, Albisinni U, et al. Health and ageing: a cross-sectional study of body composition. Clin Nutr. 2013 Aug;32(4):569–78. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2012.10.004.
Kelly TL, Wilson KE, Heymsfield SB. Dual energy X-Ray absorptiometry body composition reference values from NHANES. PLoS One. 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7038. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007038.
Studenski SA, Peters KW, Alley DE, Cawthon PM, McLean RR, Harris TB, et al. The FNIH sarcopenia project: rationale, study description, conference recommendations, and final estimates. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2014 May;69(5):547 – 58. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glu010.
Liu L-K, Lee W-J, Liu C-L, Chen L-Y, Lin M-H, Peng L-N, et al. Age-related skeletal muscle mass loss and physical performance in Taiwan: implications to diagnostic strategy of sarcopenia in Asia. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2013 Oct;13(4):964–71. doi: 10.1111/ggi.12040.
Cawthon PM, Parimi N, Langsetmo L, Cauley JA, Ensrud KE, Cummings SR, et al. Individual and joint trajectories of change in bone, lean mass and physical performance in older men. BMC Geriatr. 2020 May 5;20(1):161. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01560-5.
Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Sayer AA. Sarcopenia. Lancet. 2019 Jun 29;393(10191):2636–2646. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31138-9. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019 Jun 29;393(10191):2590

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 09 Feb, 2023

Read the published version in BMC Geriatrics →

Editorial decision: Major revision
18 Oct, 2022
Reviews received at journal
09 Oct, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
29 Sep, 2022
Reviews received at journal
16 Aug, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
10 Aug, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
09 Aug, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
02 Aug, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
30 Jul, 2022
Editor invited by journal
08 Jul, 2022
Submission checks completed at journal
08 Jul, 2022
First submitted to journal
07 Jul, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

Multicompartment body composition analysis in older adults: a cross-sectional study

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Background

Methods

Design and Study population

Study protocol

The dependent variables

The independent variables

Statistical analysis

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1