Suppr超能文献

与道格拉斯袋法相比,通气校正后的ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400能对运动员的静息代谢率(RMR)进行有效且可靠的评估。

The Ventilation-Corrected ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400 Provides a Valid and Reliable Assessment of Resting Metabolic Rate (RMR) in Athletes Compared With the Douglas Bag Method.

作者信息

Woods Amy L, Garvican-Lewis Laura A, Rice Anthony J, Thompson Kevin G

出版信息

Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2016 Oct;26(5):454-463. doi: 10.1123/ijsnem.2015-0315. Epub 2016 Aug 24.

Abstract

The aim of the current study was to determine if a single ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400 metabolic cart provides valid and reliable measurement of RMR in comparison with the criterion Douglas Bag method (DB). Ten endurance-trained participants completed duplicate RMR measurements on 2 consecutive days using the ParvoMedics system in exercise mode, with the same expirate analyzed using DB. Typical error (TE) in mean RMR between the systems was 578.9 kJ or 7.5% (p = .01). In comparison with DB, the ParvoMedics system over-estimated RMR by 946.7 ± 818.6 kJ. The bias between systems resulted from ParvoMedics V values. A regression equation was developed to correct the bias, which reduced the difference to -83.3 ± 631.9 kJ. TE for the corrected ParvoMedics data were 446.8 kJ or 7.2% (p = .70). On Day 1, intraday reliability in mean RMR for DB was 286.8 kJ or 4.3%, (p = .54) and for ParvoMedics, 359.3 kJ or 4.4%, (p = .35), with closer agreement observed on Day 2. Interday reliability for DB was 455.3 kJ or 6.6% (p = .61) and for ParvoMedics, 390.2 kJ or 6.3% (p = .54). Similar intraday and interday TE was observed between ParvoMedics and ParvoMedics data. The ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400 provided valid and reliable RMR values compared with DB when the V error was corrected. This will enable widespread monitoring of RMR using the ParvoMedics system in a range of field-based settings when DB is not available.

摘要

本研究的目的是确定与标准道格拉斯袋法(DB)相比,一台ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400代谢车能否提供有效且可靠的静息代谢率(RMR)测量值。十名耐力训练参与者连续两天使用ParvoMedics系统的运动模式完成了重复的RMR测量,并使用DB对相同的呼气样本进行分析。两种系统之间平均RMR的典型误差(TE)为578.9千焦或7.5%(p = 0.01)。与DB相比,ParvoMedics系统高估了RMR 946.7±818.6千焦。系统之间的偏差源于ParvoMedics的V值。建立了一个回归方程来校正偏差,将差异减小到-83.3±631.9千焦。校正后的ParvoMedics数据的TE为446.8千焦或7.2%(p = 0.70)。在第一天,DB平均RMR的日内可靠性为286.8千焦或4.3%(p = 0.54),ParvoMedics为359.3千焦或4.4%(p = 0.35),第二天观察到的一致性更高。DB的日间可靠性为455.3千焦或6.6%(p = 0.61),ParvoMedics为390.2千焦或6.3%(p = 0.54)。ParvoMedics与校正后的ParvoMedics数据之间观察到相似的日内和日间TE。当V误差得到校正时,与DB相比,ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400提供了有效且可靠的RMR值。这将使得在无法使用DB的一系列现场环境中,能够使用ParvoMedics系统广泛监测RMR。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验