These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: How accurate are resting energy expenditure prediction equations in obese trauma and burn patients?
    Author: Stucky CC, Moncure M, Hise M, Gossage CM, Northrop D.
    Journal: JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr; 2008; 32(4):420-6. PubMed ID: 18596313.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: While the prevalence of obesity continues to increase in our society, outdated resting energy expenditure (REE) prediction equations may overpredict energy requirements in obese patients. Accurate feeding is essential since overfeeding has been demonstrated to adversely affect outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The first objective was to compare REE calculated by prediction equations to the measured REE in obese trauma and burn patients. Our hypothesis was that an equation using fat-free mass would give a more accurate prediction. The second objective was to consider the effect of a commonly used injury factor on the predicted REE. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on 28 patients. REE was measured using indirect calorimetry and compared with the Harris-Benedict and Cunningham equations, and an equation using type II diabetes as a factor. Statistical analyses used were paired t test, +/-95% confidence interval, and the Bland-Altman method. RESULTS: Measured average REE in trauma and burn patients was 21.37 +/- 5.26 and 21.81 +/- 3.35 kcal/kg/d, respectively. Harris-Benedict underpredicted REE in trauma and burn patients to the least extent, while the Cunningham equation underpredicted REE in both populations to the greatest extent. Using an injury factor of 1.2, Cunningham continued to underestimate REE in both populations, while the Harris-Benedict and Diabetic equations overpredicted REE in both populations. CONCLUSIONS: The measured average REE is significantly less than current guidelines. This finding suggests that a hypocaloric regimen is worth considering for ICU patients. Also, if an injury factor of 1.2 is incorporated in certain equations, patients may be given too many calories.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]