AJCN North Carolina Research Campus
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gleichauf, C. N.
Right arrow Articles by Roe, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gleichauf, C. N.
Right arrow Articles by Roe, D. A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Gleichauf, C. N.
Right arrow Articles by Roe, D. A.

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 50, 903-907, Copyright © 1989 by The American Society for Clinical Nutrition, Inc

ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS

The menstrual cycle's effect on the reliability of bioimpedance measurements for assessing body composition

CN Gleichauf and DA Roe
Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.

We examined the reliability of resistance (R) and body composition estimates measured by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) in 25 women during their menstrual cycle. Weight and bioimpedance were measured daily for one cycle and sodium intake was assessed. The precision of bioimpedance measures was examined and subjects' average resistance, weight, Na intake, and calculated body composition during the four phases of menses were compared by using paired t tests. Significant differences were observed between phases 1 and 2 for R (p less than 0.001), weight (p less than 0.05), and fat-free mass (p less than 0.05) and differences were observed between phases 2 and 4 for R (p less than 0.05) and weight (p less than 0.05); no significant differences were observed for percent body fat. Changes in body weight (p less than 0.001) associated with Na intake explained a significant proportion of error in resistance measures. These data suggest the reliability of the BIA body composition approach during menses; small weight changes related to hydration status may, however, be a confounding influence.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1989 by The American Society for Nutrition