ENFA, ISAK and bioimpedance
All 3 are used to study body composition, but they do not measure the same things or serve the same purpose. Here is what sets them apart, according to the method itself.
| ENFA® Method | Kerr method (ISAK) | Bioimpedance | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Components it determines | 5: Fat Mass, Skeletal Mass, Muscle Mass, Visceral Mass and Residual Mass | 5: Skin, Fat Mass, Skeletal Mass, Muscle Mass and Residual or Visceral Mass | 2: Fat Mass and Lean Mass |
| Fifth component | Residual Mass, which corresponds to excess fluid in the form of edema or water retention | Skin. It treats Residual and Visceral as synonyms | Not applicable |
| Determines Nutritional Diagnosis | Based on the Protein Reserve and the Caloric Reserve | ||
| Skeletal Mass calculation | The one from the original method | Modified from the original method, underestimating the skeleton | Does not determine it |
| Weight/Height correction | R correction factor for subjects who differ from the Phantom's Weight/Height | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| Reproducibility | Meets the conditions defined by the WHO | — | Influenced by body temperature, respiratory rate, physical activity, menstrual cycle and ambient temperature |
| Method error | 2.39% | 4% | 20% |
Differences between the ENFA method and the Kerr method (ISAK)
Both determine a measurement distribution profile, somatotype and 5 components, but those components are different. The ENFA method determines Fat Mass, Skeletal Mass, Muscle Mass, Visceral Mass and Residual Mass. The Kerr method determines skin, Fat Mass, Skeletal Mass, Muscle Mass and Residual or Visceral Mass.
The Kerr method treats Residual and Visceral as synonyms and its fifth component is Skin. In the ENFA method, the fifth component is Residual Mass (not a synonym of Visceral) and corresponds to excess fluid in the form of edema or water retention.
The ENFA method is the only one that determines the Nutritional Diagnosis based on the Protein Reserve and the Caloric Reserve, a concept created by Dr. Basaluzzo.
In addition, in the calculation of Fat Mass, the ENFA method has an R correction factor for subjects who differ from the Phantom's Weight/Height. The Kerr method modified the Skeletal Mass calculation of the original method. That is why the results of the two methods are different and not comparable.
Differences between the ENFA method and Bioimpedance
Bioimpedance determines only 2 components: Fat Mass and Lean Mass (Lean Mass is not a synonym of Muscle Mass), obtained from the difference in the conduction speed of a low-voltage electrical current. The results are influenced by body temperature, respiratory rate, whether the person has done physical activity, the menstrual cycle and even the ambient temperature. For this reason, it is not reproducible. In other words, this method could be useful for calculating those 2 components in male subjects (because they have little water retention) and who have a small amount of fat mass.
Nutritional Assessment by Anthropometric Fractionation
The only Method that determines the Nutritional Diagnosis based on the Protein Reserve and the Caloric Reserve. It meets the conditions defined by the WHO for a methodology to be applicable in professional practice, which are:
Safety, Feasibility, Reproducibility and Low operating cost.
Join the ENFA® Community and transform your Nutrition Practice
Weight, height or isolated measurements are not enough to carry out a Nutritional Assessment. Do you want to be innovative and specific in your practice? Apply the ENFA® method! The only method that determines a Nutritional Diagnosis and lets you define the specific nutritional therapy for your patient.