在静息能量消耗评估中，便携式臂带与间接测热法之间的一致性较差。

Poor agreement between a portable armband and indirect calorimetry in the assessment of resting energy expenditure.

作者信息

Bertoli S, Posata A, Battezzati A, Spadafranca A, Testolin G, Bedogni G

机构信息

International Center for the Assessment of Nutritional Status, University of Milano, Milano, Italy.

出版信息

Clin Nutr. 2008 Apr;27(2):307-10. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2007.11.005. Epub 2008 Feb 13.

DOI:10.1016/j.clnu.2007.11.005

PMID:18276043

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: To evaluate the agreement between resting energy expenditure (REE) estimated by a portable armband and measured by indirect calorimetry.

METHODS

One-hundred and twenty-seven women and 42 men with a mean (SD) age of 44 (12) years and a body mass index of 30.2 (5.4) kg/m(2) were studied. REE was estimated using the Sense Wear Pro 2 Armband (SWA), measured using the Sensor Medics 29 metabolic cart (V(max)), and estimated using Schofield's equation. The limits of agreement (LOA) and the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were used to evaluate the interchangeability of the methods.

RESULTS

The LOA between REE(SWA) and REE(Vmax) were wide in both women (-269 to 378 kcal/day) and men (-330 to 545 kcal/day) and CCC was low (0.579 in females and 0.583 in males, p<0.0001 for both). REE(Schofield) agreed with REE(Vmax) to a similar degree (CCC=0.563 in females and 0.500 in males, p<0.0001 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

SWA and indirect calorimetry are not interchangeable methods for the assessment of REE in normal-weight and obese subjects.

摘要

背景与目的

评估通过便携式臂带估算的静息能量消耗（REE）与通过间接测热法测量的REE之间的一致性。

方法

对127名女性和42名男性进行了研究，他们的平均（标准差）年龄为44（12）岁，体重指数为30.2（5.4）kg/m²。使用Sense Wear Pro 2臂带（SWA）估算REE，使用Sensor Medics 29代谢车（Vmax）测量REE，并使用Schofield方程进行估算。使用一致性界限（LOA）和一致性相关系数（CCC）来评估这些方法的可互换性。

结果

REE（SWA）与REE（Vmax）之间的LOA在女性（-269至378千卡/天）和男性（-330至545千卡/天）中都很宽，并且CCC较低（女性为0.579，男性为0.583，两者p<0.0001）。REE（Schofield）与REE（Vmax）的一致性程度相似（女性CCC=0.563，男性CCC=0.500，两者p<0.0001）。