Effects of whole-body electromyostimulation combined with individualized nutritional support on body composition in patients with advanced cancer: a controlled pilot trial

Table 3 Estimated effect of WB-EMS on body composition and hand grip strength calculated by LMM

	Estimated effect of WB-EMS intervention compared to controls^a
	Week 4	p	Week 8	p	Week 12	p
	Estimate [95% CI]	p	Estimate [95% CI]	p	Estimate [95% CI]	p
Body composition
SMM [kg]	−0.04 [− 0.49, 0.40]	0.848	0.31 [− 0.16, 0.78]	0.201	0.53 [0.08, 0.98]	0.022
Bodyweight [kg]	−0.02 [− 0.97, 0.93]	0.966	0.87 [− 0.13, 1.87]	0.077	1.02 [0.05, 1.98]	0.039
FM [%]	0.75 [−0.20, 1.70]	0.121	0.14 [−0.87, 1.14]	0.789	0.51 [−0.46, 1.47]	0.302
PhA [°]	0.04 [−0.09, 0.016]	0.557	−0.01 [− 0.14, 0.13]	0.946	0.07 [− 0.06, 0.19]	0.320
Hydration [%]^b	− 0.98 [− 2.97, 1.01]	0.334	− 0.48 [− 2.58, 1.62]	0.655	− 2.73 [− 4.76, − 0.71]	0.008
Functional status
Hand grip strength [kg]	−0.20 [− 2.24, 1.84]	0.847	− 0.64 [− 2.68, 1.39]	0.535	0.60 [− 1.08, 2.27]	0.484

Statistically significant effects are marked in bold type and indicated by p < 0.05
Abbreviations: WB-EMS Whole-body electromyostimulation, SMM Skeletal muscle mass, FM Fat mass, PhA Phase angle, ECW Extracellular water, ICW Intracellular water
^aLinear mixed model analysis estimating the effect (group x time) of the combined WB EMS and nutrition intervention on the primary outcome of skeletal muscle mass and secondary outcomes of body composition and hand grip strength over the 12-week study course compared to the usual care control group. Data are presented as estimated mean difference between study groups and 95% confidence intervals [95% CI]
^bHydration represents ECW:ICW in %

ISSN: 1471-2407