Associations of Anthropometry and Handgrip Strength with Bioelectrical Impedance Parameters in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Cross-Sectional Study
- 1Department of Internal Medicine and Clinical Nutrition Centre, Third Faculty of Medicine, Thomayer University Hospital, Charles University, Vídeňská 800, 140 59 Prague 4, Czech Republic
- 2Nutrition and Dietetics Centre, Thomayer University Hospital, Vídeňská 800, 140 59 Prague 4, Czech Republic
- 3Department of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Ruská 87, 100 00 Prague 10, Czech Republic
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Simple anthropometry may complement nutritional assessment in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We examined the associations of arm anthropometry and handgrip strength (HGS) with bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) parameters. Methods: This cross-sectional baseline analysis included 55 adults with IBS-D or IBS-M for valid non-adiposity measurements; 54 contributed valid paired body-fat estimates, and 54 had valid dominant-hand HGS. Results: MUAMC correlated with BIA-derived skeletal muscle mass within men (Spearman’s ρ = 0.748) and women (ρ = 0.673). After adjustment for sex, age, height and body weight, the MUAMC association was attenuated (β = 0.0337 kg/mm, 95% CI 0.0059–0.0616; p = 0.0187). MUAMC was correlated with phase angle in the pooled sample (ρ = 0.806), but sex-related differences were exploratory. In a sensitivity model using the impedance index, the association was not significant after further adjustment for body weight (β = 0.0670, 95% CI −0.0087 to 0.1427; p = 0.0816). HGS correlated with BIA-derived skeletal muscle mass before adjustment (ρ = 0.769; n = 54), whereas an adjusted association was not established. BIA- and skinfold-derived body-fat estimates were correlated but showed proportional bias, limiting interchangeability. Conclusions: MUAMC is associated with BIA-derived muscle-related parameters, but mathematical coupling, body size and the absence of a criterion method limit causal and validation claims. Findings from this exploratory single-centre analysis require independent confirmation.
Related
- Missing Link between Glycemic Control and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis
- Bioelectrical impedance-derived body composition and systemic therapy outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer
- Toward Clinically Feasible Assessment of Muscle Mass: Validation of a Seated Bioelectrical Impedance Device Against Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXA) in Older Adults
- Association of electrical properties of bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy with sedentary time, physical activity and muscle function in older adults
- Trimester-Specific Bioelectrical Impedance Reference Curves in Physiological Pregnancy: Mapping Maternal Body Composition and Hydration Trajectories
BibTeX
@article{vejmelka2026associations,
title = {{Associations of Anthropometry and Handgrip Strength with Bioelectrical Impedance Parameters in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Cross-Sectional Study}},
author = {Jiří Vejmelka and Martina Kollerová and Ivana Pražanová and Khanh Ha Pham and Magdalena Trusinová and Pavel Kohout},
journal = {Nutrients},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.3390/nu18213711},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/18/21/3711},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Associations of Anthropometry and Handgrip Strength with Bioelectrical Impedance Parameters in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Cross-Sectional Study
AU - Jiří Vejmelka
AU - Martina Kollerová
AU - Ivana Pražanová
AU - Khanh Ha Pham
AU - Magdalena Trusinová
AU - Pavel Kohout
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/09
JO - Nutrients
DO - 10.3390/nu18213711
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/18/21/3711
AB - Background/Objectives: Simple anthropometry may complement nutritional assessment in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We examined the associations of arm anthropometry and handgrip strength (HGS) with bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) parameters. Methods: This cross-sectional baseline analysis included 55 adults with IBS-D or IBS-M for valid non-adiposity measurements; 54 contributed valid paired body-fat estimates, and 54 had valid dominant-hand HGS. Results: MUAMC correlated with BIA-derived skeletal muscle mass within men (Spearman’s ρ = 0.748) and women (ρ = 0.673). After adjustment for sex, age, height and body weight, the MUAMC association was attenuated (β = 0.0337 kg/mm, 95% CI 0.0059–0.0616; p = 0.0187). MUAMC was correlated with phase angle in the pooled sample (ρ = 0.806), but sex-related differences were exploratory. In a sensitivity model using the impedance index, the association was not significant after further adjustment for body weight (β = 0.0670, 95% CI −0.0087 to 0.1427; p = 0.0816). HGS correlated with BIA-derived skeletal muscle mass before adjustment (ρ = 0.769; n = 54), whereas an adjusted association was not established. BIA- and skinfold-derived body-fat estimates were correlated but showed proportional bias, limiting interchangeability. Conclusions: MUAMC is associated with BIA-derived muscle-related parameters, but mathematical coupling, body size and the absence of a criterion method limit causal and validation claims. Findings from this exploratory single-centre analysis require independent confirmation.
SN - 2072-6643
ER -