Accuracy and Precision of Multiple Laboratory and Field Methods to The CriterionIn VivoFive-Compartment Body Composition Model and Their Association with Muscle Strength in Collegiate Athletes of Varying States of Hydration: TheDa KineProtocol Study
Authors: Cataldi Devon , Bennett Jonathan P. , Wong Michael C. , Quon Brandon K. , Liu Yong En , Kelly Nisa , Kelly Thomas , Schoeller Dale A. , Heymsfield Steven B. , Shepherd John A. 
Published: June 2023

ObjectiveTo compare multiple body composition analysis methods in athletes with varying states of hydration to the criterion 5-compartment model(5CM) of body composition and assess the relationships of technique-specific estimates of fat and fat-free mass(FM, FFM) to muscle strength.MethodsBody composition was assessed in 80(40-female) athletes with a mean age of 21.8±4.2 years. All athletes underwent laboratory-based methods: air-displacement plethysmography(ADP), deuterium-oxide dilution(D2O), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry(DXA), underwater-weighing(UWW), and field-based: 3D-optical(3DO) imaging, and three bioelectrical impedance(BIA) devices(S10/SFB7/SOZO). Participants’ muscular strength was assessed by isokinetic/isometric dynamometry. Accuracy was assessed by Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient(CCC) and precision by root-mean-square coefficient of variation(RMS-CV%).ResultsAthletes’ hydration status(total body water/FFM) was significantly(p<0.05) outside of the normal range in both males(0.63-0.73%) and females(0.58-0.78%). The most accurate techniques(ADP/DXA) showed moderate-substantial agreement(CCC=0.90-0.95) in FM and FFM, whereas all field assessments had poor agreement(CCC<0.90), except 3DO FFM in females(CCC=0.91). All measures of FFM produced excellent <1.0% precision, whereas FM from ADP, DXA, D2O, S10, and UWW had <2.0%. The associations between muscle strength and the various devices’ FFM estimates differed. However, more accurate body composition compared to the criterion produced a better determination of muscle strength by significant quartilep-trends(p<0.001). The 5CM exhibits the highest determination for all categories of muscle strength which persisted across all hydration measures.ConclusionTo optimize accuracy in assessing body composition and muscle strength, researchers and clinicians should prioritize selecting devices based on their accuracy compared to the 5CM. Reliable approaches such as ADP and DXA yield accurate and precise body composition estimates and thereby, better strength assessments, regardless of hydration status. Future athlete studies should investigate the impact of changes in FFM on functional measures compared to the criterion method.Summary BoxThis study compared various body composition analysis methods in athletes with varying states of hydration to the criterion 5-compartment model(5CM) and assessed their relationship to muscle strength. The results showed that accurate and precise estimates of body composition can be determined in athletes, and a more accurate body composition measurement produced better strength estimates. The best laboratory-based techniques were air displacement plethysmography(ADP) and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry(DXA), while field assessments had moderate-poor agreement. Prioritize accurate body composition assessment devices compared to the 5CM for better strength estimates in athletes.