Skip to main content
ARS Home » Plains Area » Houston, Texas » Children's Nutrition Research Center » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #102254
Title: DETERMINING BONE AND TOTAL BODY MINERAL CONTENT FROM BODY DENSITY AND BIOELECTRICAL RESPONSE SPECTROSCOPY

Author
item SICONOLFI, STEVEN - NASA/JSC
item GRETEBECK, RANDAL - PURDUE UNIVERSITY
item Wong, William
item MOORE, SHERIL - UNIV.SPACE RESEARCH ASSOC
item GILBERT III, JOHN - AEROSPACE CONSULTANT ENT.

Submitted to: Journal of Applied Physiology
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 6/15/1998
Publication Date: N/A
Citation: N/A

Interpretive Summary: Space flight brings about adaptational changes in an astronaut's body, such as decreases in bone mineral content. It is important to monitor these bone changes, which can be significant over a long period of time. However, monitoring bone mineral content with traditional bone density instruments is not possible during flight because of the substantial size and power requirements of these instruments. Therefore, we wanted to determine whether it was possible to estimate bone and total body mineral content from measurements of body density and bioelectrical response spectroscopy by using a particular mathematical model. We evaluated these measurements in a group of men and women and found that our hypothesis was correct. This information will be useful in contributing to the body of scientific literature on appropriate ways of measuring bone density.

Technical Abstract: We hypothesized that one could assess total body mineral (TBM) and bone mineral content (BMC) from measurements of body density and bioelectrical response spectroscopy (BRS)-determined total body water by using a three- compartment (3C) model. We compared TBM and BMC computed from measurements of water (2H2O dilution or BRS) and body density (underwater weighing) with h[4-compartment (4C)] and without (3C) mineral (dual x-ray absorptiometry) in 15 women and 16 men. BRS used multifrequency or single-frequency estimates of water. Mean differences between the 3C and 4C models ranged from -6.1 to 2.2%. Correlations between models were 0.82-0.91. Standard errors of the estimate of 8.5-9.3% were within the range of those previously reported, i.e., 4.9-13%. Use of BRS did not significantly decrease the strength of the correlations between the models. A significant mean difference (only in women) was found only with 3C single-frequency BRS Sestimates of TBM and BMC. We concluded that investigators can assess TBM and BMC 3C multifrequency BRS estimates in men and women.