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: Basal metabolic rate using indirect calorimetry among individuals living with overweight or obesity: The accuracy of predictive equations for basal metabolic rate.
    Author: Van Dessel K, Verrijken A, De Block C, Verhaegen A, Peiffer F, Van Gaal L, De Wachter C, Dirinck E.
    Journal: Clin Nutr ESPEN; 2024 Feb; 59():422-435. PubMed ID: 38220405.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: Weight reduction programs in people with overweight or obesity can be informed by indirect calorimetry (IC) which is the gold standard to measure basal metabolic rate (BMR). Since IC is labor intensive and expensive, predictive equations are often used as an alternative. In this study the accuracy rate was assessed and bias statistics of predictive equations were compared to IC among subjects with overweight or obesity. Secondly, differences in clinical features between individuals with over-, accurate or underestimation of their BMR were evaluated. METHODS: This cross sectional study included 731 subjects from the outpatient obesity clinic of the Antwerp University Hospital, Belgium. Fourteen equations were evaluated. Overestimation and underestimation was defined as >10 % and <10 % of measured BMR. RESULTS: In the total population, mean age was 43 ± 13 years, mean BMI 35.6 ± 5.8 kg/m2 and 79.5 % were female. The highest accuracy rates were reached by the Henry (73 %), Ravussin (73 %) and Mifflin St. Jeor (73 %) equations. In the total population, the Mifflin St. Jeor and Henry equation were unbiased. The Akern, Livingston and Ravussin equations were biased to underestimation. All other equations were biased to overestimation. Subjects with an underestimation of BMR had significantly higher waist-hip ratio (1.02 ± 0.13 vs 0.91 ± 0.11; P < 0.001), higher visceral adipose tissue (239 ± 96 vs 162 ± 93; P < 0.001), lower fat free mass (kg) (67.6 (45.4-95.9) vs 54.0 (39.6-95.5); P < 0.001) and a higher prevalence of the Metabolic Syndrome (24 (77.4) vs 112 (37.5); P < 0.001). Individuals with an overestimation of BMR had significantly higher subcutaneous adipose tissue (545 ± 149 vs 612 ± 149; P < 0.05), lower fasting plasma insulin (81 (10-2019) vs 67 (27-253); P < 0.001) and lower 2-h plasma glucose (132 (30-430) vs 116 (43-193); P < 0.001) during OGTT. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the Henry and Mifflin St. Jeor equations have the highest accuracy and lowest bias to estimate the basal metabolic rate in a Caucasian, predominantly female, population living with overweight or obesity. Visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue and presence of metabolic syndrome were significantly different in individuals with over- or underestimation of BMR.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]