Prof. Andrea B. Maier, Department of Human Movement Sciences, @Age, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, P: +31 20 5988450; E:
J Nutr Health Aging. 2023;27(10):833-841. doi: 10.1007/s12603-023-1970-5.
To assess if nutritional interventions informed by indirect calorimetry (IC), compared to predictive equations, show greater improvements in achieving weight goals, muscle mass, strength, physical and functional performance.
Quasi-experimental study.
Geriatric rehabilitation inpatients referred to dietitian.
Patients were allocated based on admission ward to either the IC or equation (EQ) group. Measured resting metabolic rate (RMR) by IC was communicated to the treating dietitian for the IC group but concealed for the EQ group. Achieving weight goals was determined by comparing individualised weight goals with weight changes from inclusion to discharge (weight gain/loss: >2% change, maintenance: ≤2%). Muscle mass, strength, physical and functional performance were assessed at admission and discharge. Food intake was assessed twice over three-days at inclusion and before discharge using plate waste observation.
Fifty-three patients were included (IC n=22; EQ n=31; age: 84.3±8.4 years). The measured RMR was lower than the estimated RMR within both groups [mean difference IC -282 (95%CI -490;-203), EQ -273 (-381;-42) kcal/day)] and comparable between-groups (median IC 1271 [interquartile range 1111;1446] versus EQ 1302 [1135;1397] kcal/day, p=0.800). Energy targets in the IC group were lower than the EQ group [mean difference -317 (95%CI -479;-155) kcal/day]. There were no between-group differences in energy intake, achieving weight goals, changes in muscle mass, strength, physical and functional performance.
In geriatric rehabilitation inpatients, nutritional interventions informed by IC compared to predictive equations showed no greater improvement in achieving weight goals, muscle mass, strength, physical and functional performance. IC facilitates more accurate determination of energy targets in this population. However, evidence for the potential benefits of its use in nutrition interventions was limited by a lack of agreement between patients' energy intake and energy targets.
评估基于间接测热法(IC)的营养干预与预测方程相比,是否能更有效地实现体重目标、增加肌肉质量、增强力量、改善身体和功能表现。
准实验研究。
被转诊给营养师的老年康复住院患者。
根据入院病房将患者分配到 IC 组或方程(EQ)组。IC 组的治疗营养师会收到通过 IC 测量的静息代谢率(RMR),但 EQ 组则无法得知。通过将个体体重目标与从入院到出院的体重变化进行比较来确定是否达到体重目标(体重增加/损失:>2%的变化,维持:≤2%)。在入院和出院时评估肌肉质量、力量、身体和功能表现。在纳入和出院前,使用餐盘剩余物观察法,在三天内两次评估饮食摄入。
共纳入 53 名患者(IC 组 22 名;EQ 组 31 名;年龄:84.3±8.4 岁)。两组的实测 RMR 均低于估算 RMR[IC 组平均差值-282(95%CI -490;-203),EQ 组-273(-381;-42)kcal/天],且两组间无差异(IC 组中位数 1271[四分位距 1111;1446]与 EQ 组 1302[1135;1397]kcal/天,p=0.800)。IC 组的能量目标低于 EQ 组[平均差值-317(95%CI -479;-155)kcal/天]。两组间的能量摄入、体重目标实现情况、肌肉质量、力量、身体和功能表现的变化均无差异。
在老年康复住院患者中,与预测方程相比,基于 IC 的营养干预在实现体重目标、增加肌肉质量、增强力量、改善身体和功能表现方面并无明显改善。IC 有助于更准确地确定该人群的能量目标。然而,由于患者的能量摄入与能量目标之间存在差异,其在营养干预中的潜在益处的证据有限。