HE42 - Comparison of the Commercially Available InBody Dial H30 with a Three-Compartment Criterion in Recreationally Active Adults

SCURS Disciplines

Medicine & Health Sciences

Document Type

General Poster

Invited Presentation Choice

Not Applicable

Abstract

Background Body composition is an important determinant for health and athletic performance. Multi-compartment models are considered “gold standard” but require trained technicians, costly equipment, and significant time, making them rarely feasible for general population or athletic settings. Commercially available, consumer-grade bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices are inexpensive, portable, require no specialized training, and provide rapid assessments, making them more practical outside of research or clinical settings. However, no studies have examined the accuracy of the commercially available, consumer-grade InBody Dial H30 BIA device. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare body fat percentage (BF%), fat mass (FM), and fat-free mass (FFM) estimates from the InBody Dial H30 with those obtained from the criterion Siri 3C model.

Methods Healthy, recreationally active males and females arrived at the laboratory (0600–0900 h) in compression clothing following an overnight fast, avoiding caffeine (12 h), exercise (24 h), and alcohol (24 h). Each participant completed three body composition assessments: air displacement plethysmography, laboratory-grade multi-frequency BIA, and consumer-grade multi-frequency BIA (BIAH30; InBody Dial H30). The validated Siri-3C model served as the criterion measure (3C). Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to determine group differences, and Bland-Altman analysis with regression was used to assess agreement.

Results Fifty-five participants (29 males, 26 females; 22 ± 4 years, 170.5 ± 8.2 cm, 24.2 ± 2.6 kg/m2) completed the study. BF% (21.7 ± 7.8% vs 19.9 ± 7.8%) and FM (15.3 ± 5.8 vs 14.0 ± 5.8 kg) were overestimated with BIAH30 compared to 3C (p < 0.001), whereas FFM (55.5 ± 10.6 vs 56.7 ± 10.4 kg) was underestimated (p < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis indicated mean biases of 1.9% (95% LOA: -4.0 to 7.7%), 1.3 kg (95% LOA: -2.7 to 5.3 kg), and -1.2 (95% LOA: -5.1 to 2.8 kg) for BF%, FM, and FFM, respectively, with no proportional bias observed.

Conclusions The InBody H30 produced significant differences in BF%, FM, and FFM relative to the criterion 3C model. Mean bias was small and no proportional bias was observed. However, 95% limits of agreement were wide, indicating notable individual variability. While the H30 may serve as a practical, low-cost option for group-level estimates or longitudinal tracking in applied settings, it should not be considered interchangeable with multi-compartment models for precise individual-level measurement.

Keywords

Body Composition, Body Fat, Fat-Free Mass, Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis

Start Date

10-4-2026 9:30 AM

Location

University Readiness Center Greatroom

End Date

10-4-2026 11:30 AM

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Apr 10th, 9:30 AM Apr 10th, 11:30 AM

HE42 - Comparison of the Commercially Available InBody Dial H30 with a Three-Compartment Criterion in Recreationally Active Adults

University Readiness Center Greatroom

Background Body composition is an important determinant for health and athletic performance. Multi-compartment models are considered “gold standard” but require trained technicians, costly equipment, and significant time, making them rarely feasible for general population or athletic settings. Commercially available, consumer-grade bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices are inexpensive, portable, require no specialized training, and provide rapid assessments, making them more practical outside of research or clinical settings. However, no studies have examined the accuracy of the commercially available, consumer-grade InBody Dial H30 BIA device. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare body fat percentage (BF%), fat mass (FM), and fat-free mass (FFM) estimates from the InBody Dial H30 with those obtained from the criterion Siri 3C model.

Methods Healthy, recreationally active males and females arrived at the laboratory (0600–0900 h) in compression clothing following an overnight fast, avoiding caffeine (12 h), exercise (24 h), and alcohol (24 h). Each participant completed three body composition assessments: air displacement plethysmography, laboratory-grade multi-frequency BIA, and consumer-grade multi-frequency BIA (BIAH30; InBody Dial H30). The validated Siri-3C model served as the criterion measure (3C). Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to determine group differences, and Bland-Altman analysis with regression was used to assess agreement.

Results Fifty-five participants (29 males, 26 females; 22 ± 4 years, 170.5 ± 8.2 cm, 24.2 ± 2.6 kg/m2) completed the study. BF% (21.7 ± 7.8% vs 19.9 ± 7.8%) and FM (15.3 ± 5.8 vs 14.0 ± 5.8 kg) were overestimated with BIAH30 compared to 3C (p < 0.001), whereas FFM (55.5 ± 10.6 vs 56.7 ± 10.4 kg) was underestimated (p < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis indicated mean biases of 1.9% (95% LOA: -4.0 to 7.7%), 1.3 kg (95% LOA: -2.7 to 5.3 kg), and -1.2 (95% LOA: -5.1 to 2.8 kg) for BF%, FM, and FFM, respectively, with no proportional bias observed.

Conclusions The InBody H30 produced significant differences in BF%, FM, and FFM relative to the criterion 3C model. Mean bias was small and no proportional bias was observed. However, 95% limits of agreement were wide, indicating notable individual variability. While the H30 may serve as a practical, low-cost option for group-level estimates or longitudinal tracking in applied settings, it should not be considered interchangeable with multi-compartment models for precise individual-level measurement.