Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Hand-held indirect calorimeter offers advantages compared with prediction equations, in a group of overweight women, to determine resting energy expenditures and estimated total energy expenditures during research screening.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare standardized prediction equations to a hand-held indirect calorimeter in estimating resting energy and total energy requirements in overweight women.

DESIGN

Resting energy expenditure (REE) was measured by hand-held indirect calorimeter and calculated by prediction equations Harris-Benedict, Mifflin-St Jeor, World Health Organization/Food and Agriculture Organization/United Nations University (WHO), and Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI). Physical activity level, assessed by questionnaire, was used to estimate total energy expenditure (TEE).

SUBJECTS

Subjects (n=39) were female nonsmokers older than 25 years of age with body mass index more than 25.

STATISTICAL ANALYSES

Repeated measures analysis of variance, Bland-Altman plot, and fitted regression line of difference. A difference within +/-10% of two methods indicated agreement.

RESULTS

Significant proportional bias was present between hand-held indirect calorimeter and prediction equations for REE and TEE (P<0.01); prediction equations overestimated at lower values and underestimated at higher values. Mean differences (+/-standard error) for REE and TEE between hand-held indirect calorimeter and Harris-Benedict were -5.98+/-46.7 kcal/day (P=0.90) and 21.40+/-75.7 kcal/day (P=0.78); between hand-held indirect calorimeter and Mifflin-St Jeor were 69.93+/-46.7 kcal/day (P=0.14) and 116.44+/-75.9 kcal/day (P=0.13); between hand-held indirect calorimeter and WHO were -22.03+/-48.4 kcal/day (P=0.65) and -15.8+/-77.9 kcal/day (P=0.84); and between hand-held indirect calorimeter and DRI were 39.65+/-47.4 kcal/day (P=0.41) and 56.36+/-85.5 kcal/day (P=0.51). Less than 50% of predictive equation values were within +/-10% of hand-held indirect calorimeter values, indicating poor agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant discrepancy between predicted and measured energy expenditure was observed. Further evaluation of hand-held indirect calorimeter research screening is needed.

Links

  • Publisher Full Text
  • Authors+Show Affiliations

    ,

    College of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Natural Resources, University of Nevada, Reno, 1664 N Virginia St, Mail Stop 142, Reno, NV 89557, USA. kspears@cabnr.unr.edu

    , ,

    Source

    MeSH

    Adult
    Aged
    Analysis of Variance
    Basal Metabolism
    Body Mass Index
    Calorimetry, Indirect
    Energy Metabolism
    Exercise
    Female
    Humans
    Life Style
    Mathematics
    Middle Aged
    Nutrition Policy
    Nutritional Requirements
    Overweight
    Predictive Value of Tests
    Reference Values
    Regression Analysis
    Reproducibility of Results
    Sensitivity and Specificity
    World Health Organization

    Pub Type(s)

    Comparative Study
    Journal Article

    Language

    eng

    PubMed ID

    19394470

    Citation

    Spears, Karen E., et al. "Hand-held Indirect Calorimeter Offers Advantages Compared With Prediction Equations, in a Group of Overweight Women, to Determine Resting Energy Expenditures and Estimated Total Energy Expenditures During Research Screening." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, vol. 109, no. 5, 2009, pp. 836-45.
    Spears KE, Kim H, Behall KM, et al. Hand-held indirect calorimeter offers advantages compared with prediction equations, in a group of overweight women, to determine resting energy expenditures and estimated total energy expenditures during research screening. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109(5):836-45.
    Spears, K. E., Kim, H., Behall, K. M., & Conway, J. M. (2009). Hand-held indirect calorimeter offers advantages compared with prediction equations, in a group of overweight women, to determine resting energy expenditures and estimated total energy expenditures during research screening. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109(5), pp. 836-45. doi:10.1016/j.jada.2009.02.016.
    Spears KE, et al. Hand-held Indirect Calorimeter Offers Advantages Compared With Prediction Equations, in a Group of Overweight Women, to Determine Resting Energy Expenditures and Estimated Total Energy Expenditures During Research Screening. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109(5):836-45. PubMed PMID: 19394470.
    * Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
    TY - JOUR T1 - Hand-held indirect calorimeter offers advantages compared with prediction equations, in a group of overweight women, to determine resting energy expenditures and estimated total energy expenditures during research screening. AU - Spears,Karen E, AU - Kim,Hyunsook, AU - Behall,Kay M, AU - Conway,Joan M, PY - 2008/02/19/received PY - 2008/11/18/accepted PY - 2009/4/28/entrez PY - 2009/4/28/pubmed PY - 2009/5/14/medline SP - 836 EP - 45 JF - Journal of the American Dietetic Association JO - J Am Diet Assoc VL - 109 IS - 5 N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare standardized prediction equations to a hand-held indirect calorimeter in estimating resting energy and total energy requirements in overweight women. DESIGN: Resting energy expenditure (REE) was measured by hand-held indirect calorimeter and calculated by prediction equations Harris-Benedict, Mifflin-St Jeor, World Health Organization/Food and Agriculture Organization/United Nations University (WHO), and Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI). Physical activity level, assessed by questionnaire, was used to estimate total energy expenditure (TEE). SUBJECTS: Subjects (n=39) were female nonsmokers older than 25 years of age with body mass index more than 25. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Repeated measures analysis of variance, Bland-Altman plot, and fitted regression line of difference. A difference within +/-10% of two methods indicated agreement. RESULTS: Significant proportional bias was present between hand-held indirect calorimeter and prediction equations for REE and TEE (P<0.01); prediction equations overestimated at lower values and underestimated at higher values. Mean differences (+/-standard error) for REE and TEE between hand-held indirect calorimeter and Harris-Benedict were -5.98+/-46.7 kcal/day (P=0.90) and 21.40+/-75.7 kcal/day (P=0.78); between hand-held indirect calorimeter and Mifflin-St Jeor were 69.93+/-46.7 kcal/day (P=0.14) and 116.44+/-75.9 kcal/day (P=0.13); between hand-held indirect calorimeter and WHO were -22.03+/-48.4 kcal/day (P=0.65) and -15.8+/-77.9 kcal/day (P=0.84); and between hand-held indirect calorimeter and DRI were 39.65+/-47.4 kcal/day (P=0.41) and 56.36+/-85.5 kcal/day (P=0.51). Less than 50% of predictive equation values were within +/-10% of hand-held indirect calorimeter values, indicating poor agreement. CONCLUSIONS: A significant discrepancy between predicted and measured energy expenditure was observed. Further evaluation of hand-held indirect calorimeter research screening is needed. SN - 1878-3570 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19394470/Hand_held_indirect_calorimeter_offers_advantages_compared_with_prediction_equations_in_a_group_of_overweight_women_to_determine_resting_energy_expenditures_and_estimated_total_energy_expenditures_during_research_screening_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002-8223(09)00162-X DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -