McMurray Robert G, Soares Jesus, Caspersen Carl J, McCurdy Thomas
1University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC; 2Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA; and 3U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014 Jul;46(7):1352-8. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000232.
There has not been a recent comprehensive effort to examine existing studies on the resting metabolic rate (RMR) of adults to identify the effect of common population demographic and anthropometric characteristics. Thus, we reviewed the literature on RMR (kcal·kg(-1)·h(-1)) to determine the relationship of age, sex, and obesity status to RMR as compared with the commonly accepted value for the metabolic equivalent (MET; e.g., 1.0 kcal·kg(-1)·h(-1)).
Using several databases, scientific articles published from 1980 to 2011 were identified that measured RMR, and from those, others dating back to 1920 were identified. One hundred and ninety-seven studies were identified, resulting in 397 publication estimates of RMR that could represent a population subgroup. Inverse variance weighting technique was applied to compute means and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
The mean value for RMR was 0.863 kcal·kg(-1)·h(-1) (95% CI = 0.852-0.874), higher for men than women, decreasing with increasing age, and less in overweight than normal weight adults. Regardless of sex, adults with BMI ≥ 30 kg·m(-2) had the lowest RMR (<0.741 kcal·kg(-1)·h(-1)).
No single value for RMR is appropriate for all adults. Adhering to the nearly universally accepted MET convention may lead to the overestimation of the RMR of approximately 10% for men and almost 15% for women and be as high as 20%-30% for some demographic and anthropometric combinations. These large errors raise questions about the longstanding adherence to the conventional MET value for RMR. Failure to recognize this discrepancy may result in important miscalculations of energy expended from interventions using physical activity for diabetes and other chronic disease prevention efforts.
近期尚无全面的研究对成人静息代谢率(RMR)的现有研究进行考察,以确定常见人群人口统计学和人体测量学特征的影响。因此,我们回顾了关于RMR(千卡·千克⁻¹·小时⁻¹)的文献,以确定年龄、性别和肥胖状况与RMR的关系,并与普遍接受的代谢当量(MET;例如,1.0千卡·千克⁻¹·小时⁻¹)值进行比较。
通过多个数据库,确定了1980年至2011年发表的测量RMR的科学文章,并从中找出了可追溯至1920年的其他文章。共确定了197项研究,得出了397个可代表人群亚组的RMR发表估计值。应用逆方差加权技术计算均值和95%置信区间(CI)。
RMR的均值为0.863千卡·千克⁻¹·小时⁻¹(95%CI = 0.852 - 0.874),男性高于女性,随年龄增长而降低,超重成年人低于正常体重成年人。无论性别如何,BMI≥30千克·米⁻²的成年人RMR最低(<0.741千卡·千克⁻¹·小时⁻¹)。
没有一个单一的RMR值适用于所有成年人。遵循几乎被普遍接受的MET惯例可能导致男性RMR高估约10%,女性高估近15%,对于某些人口统计学和人体测量学组合,高估幅度高达20% - 30%。这些巨大误差引发了对长期坚持RMR传统MET值的质疑。未能认识到这种差异可能导致在使用体育活动预防糖尿病和其他慢性病的干预措施中,对能量消耗的重要计算错误。