用于测量静息代谢率的VO2000热量计的验证

Validation of the VO2000 calorimeter for measuring resting metabolic rate.

作者信息

Wahrlich Vivian, Anjos Luiz A, Going Scott B, Lohman Timothy G

机构信息

Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rua Leopoldo Bulhões 1480, 24020-971 Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

出版信息

Clin Nutr. 2006 Aug;25(4):687-92. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2006.01.002. Epub 2006 May 15.

DOI:10.1016/j.clnu.2006.01.002

PMID:16698140

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Metabolic carts used in laboratory settings for the measurement of resting metabolism are cumbersome limiting their use in the field. The validity of a newly developed portable calorimeter (Medical Graphics VO2000) under resting conditions was assessed in comparison to a well-established reference system, the DELTATRAC.

METHODS

Gas exchange and energy expenditure were measured for 25 min consecutively using the two devices. Values of the last 20 min were averaged and used in the analysis. The order of device for the first subject was randomly chosen and the calorimeters were alternated thereafter.

RESULTS

Among 33 subjects, acceptable measures of resting metabolism were obtained in 25 (11 men) aged 20-78 years because eight subjects (three men) either hyperventilated or did not adapt well enough to the facemask. VO(2), VCO(2), and RQ were not significantly different between devices. Small (2.8%) non-clinically relevant mean differences (-0.145+/-0.341 MJ day(-1)) were found. Results of the two devices were highly correlated (r=0.95) yielding a more accurate estimate than predictive equations.

CONCLUSIONS

The VO2000 calorimeter is a valid system to measure resting metabolism but the facemask may not be suitable for some people.

摘要

背景与目的

实验室环境中用于测量静息代谢的代谢车笨重，限制了其在现场的使用。与成熟的参考系统DELTATRAC相比，评估了一种新开发的便携式热量计（Medical Graphics VO2000）在静息条件下的有效性。

方法

使用这两种设备连续25分钟测量气体交换和能量消耗。对最后20分钟的值进行平均并用于分析。第一个受试者使用设备的顺序随机选择，此后热量计交替使用。

结果

在33名受试者中，25名（11名男性）年龄在20 - 78岁之间获得了可接受的静息代谢测量值，因为8名受试者（3名男性）要么过度通气，要么对面罩适应不足。两种设备之间的VO₂、VCO₂和RQ无显著差异。发现了小的（2.8%）无临床相关性的平均差异（-0.145±0.341 MJ·天⁻¹）。两种设备的结果高度相关（r = 0.95），比预测方程得出的估计更准确。