Bukkens S G, McNeill G
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, UK.
Ann Nutr Metab. 1990;34(2):112-8. doi: 10.1159/000177577.
Resting energy expenditure measurements were made simultaneously with an Oxylog and a ventilated hood indirect calorimeter, using (a) the Oxylog with the original oronasal face-mask and (b) the Oxylog with a mouthpiece and a noseclip, both in 15 subjects. The mean difference between Oxylog energy expenditure, when used with the mouthpiece, and ventilated hood measurements was very small: -0.4% (p less than 0.4; n = 15). When used with the face-mask, the Oxylog tended to underestimate energy expenditure relative to the ventilated hood, the mean difference being -2.4% (p = 0.054; n = 13). In 2 subjects, the Oxylog face-mask showed obvious leaks. The subjects did not find the mouthpiece less comfortable than the face-mask, and there was no evidence that the mouthpiece disturbed respiration more than the face-mask. The Oxylog is therefore suitable for measurements of resting energy expenditure, but the use of a mouthpiece and noseclip is preferable to the use of the original Oxylog face-mask.
使用(a)配备原装口鼻面罩的Oxylog和(b)配备咬嘴和鼻夹的Oxylog,对15名受试者同时进行静息能量消耗测量,测量时使用的是间接测热法的通风面罩。使用咬嘴时Oxylog的能量消耗与通风面罩测量值之间的平均差异非常小:-0.4%(p小于0.4;n = 15)。当与面罩一起使用时,相对于通风面罩,Oxylog往往会低估能量消耗,平均差异为-2.4%(p = 0.054;n = 13)。在2名受试者中,Oxylog面罩出现明显泄漏。受试者并未觉得咬嘴比面罩更不舒服,也没有证据表明咬嘴比面罩对呼吸的干扰更大。因此,Oxylog适用于静息能量消耗的测量,但使用咬嘴和鼻夹比使用原装Oxylog面罩更可取。