Measurement and comparison of multi-electrode placement for bioelectrical impedance analysis

The purpose of this examination was to determine a) how bioimpedance scanning generates data about the human body and b) compare the Bodystat Multiscan 5000 and the Skulpt Chisel. The Bodystat Multiscan 5000 is bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy (BIS) device that performs a scan of 50 measurements, from 5 kHz to 1000 kHz. This scan generates a 2d Cole analysis plot that compares the resistance and reactance of the scanned muscle group. Higher frequencies measure the amount of intracellular fluid (ICF), and lower frequencies measure the amount of extracellular fluid (ECF). Lower values for the resistance and reactance relate to a greater level of fitness for the scanned area. The Skulpt Chisel is an electrical impedance myography (EIM) that performs a single 50 kHz measurement. This scan determines the muscle quality and percent body fat of the scanned muscle group. The test subject was scanned with each device. Each plane was scanned three times with the Bodystat Multiscan 5000, and scanned five times with the Skulpt Chisel. The data was recorded to Excel and analyzed using MATLAB. The Bodystat Multiscan measurements for the surfaces were examined at a frequency of 50 kHz to be comparable to the Skulpt Chisel data. The surfaces are recorded in descending order of magnitude for resistance: medial, 22.14 Ω; anterior, 20.31 Ω; posterior, 17.89 Ω, lateral, 12.6 Ω. The Cole Analysis for the right thigh at 45-degree intervals are recorded in descending order of magnitude for resistance: medial/posterior, 23.89 Ω; posterior/lateral, 23.06 Ω; anterior/medial, 21.09 Ω, lateral/anterior, 16.13 Ω. The Skulpt Chisel surfaces are recorded in an increasing order of magnitude, the first value being muscle quality and the second value being percent body fat: lateral, 81.12, 13.1%; posterior, 62.22, 16.46%; anterior, 50.88, 19.24%; medial, 42.16, 23.16%. The data display an inverse relationship between resistance/reactance and muscle quality, and a direct relationship between resistance/reactance and percent body fat. The larger the magnitude of the resistance/reactance recorded for a muscle group, the lower the level of muscle quality will be. This leads to a larger percent body fat value.