Suppr超能文献

一种新型便携式间接热量计的有效性:AeroSport TEEM 100

Validity of a new portable indirect calorimeter: the AeroSport TEEM 100.

作者信息

Novitsky S, Segal K R, Chatr-Aryamontri B, Guvakov D, Katch V L

机构信息

Department of Movement Science, School of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 48109-2214, USA.

出版信息

Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1995;70(5):462-7. doi: 10.1007/BF00618499.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare oxygen uptake (VO2) values collected with a new portable indirect calorimeter (AeroSport TEEM 100 Metabolic Analysis System) against a more traditional large calorimeter system that has been reported to be valid and reliable (SensorMedics 2900 Metabolic Measurement Cart). Minute ventilations ranging from rest up to heavy exercise were compared with simultaneous measurements from a 120-1 Tissot gasometer. Each of the three TEEM 100 pneumotachs were tested. Three hundred and sixty-one separate ventilation tests were performed using the low-flow, medium-flow, and high-flow heads of the portable calorimeter. For each of the pneumotachs, the correlation between the portable calorimeter values and the gasometer values exceeded r = 0.94. The standard error of estimate for the low-medium- and high-flow pneumotach were 5.96, 4.89 and 9.0%, respectively, expressed relative to the mean gasometer value. Simultaneous measurements of VO2 using the portable calorimeter and the SensorMedics 2900 unit were compared during rest and at work rates starting at zero watts, increasing by 25 W to 150 W. Each work rate was of 4 min duration. The average of data from minutes 3 and 4 were used in all analyses. There was very close agreement between the two metabolic measurement systems. Except at the 100-W work rate, where the VO2 difference was small (3.9%), yet statistically significant, all of the other differences in VO2 were small and non-significant. The scatter plot of VO2 for the SensorMedics versus the portable Aero-Sport calorimeter revealed close agreement; the correlation was r = 0.96, (SEE = 3.95%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

本研究的目的是将使用新型便携式间接热量计(AeroSport TEEM 100代谢分析系统)收集的摄氧量(VO2)值与一种更传统的大型热量计系统进行比较,据报道后者有效且可靠(SensorMedics 2900代谢测量推车)。将从静息到剧烈运动范围内的分钟通气量与120 - 1型提索气体量计的同步测量值进行比较。对三个TEEM 100呼吸流速计进行了测试。使用便携式热量计的低流量、中流量和高流量探头进行了361次单独的通气测试。对于每个呼吸流速计,便携式热量计值与气体量计值之间的相关性超过r = 0.94。低、中、高流量呼吸流速计的估计标准误差分别为5.96%、4.89%和9.0%,相对于气体量计平均值表示。在静息状态以及从零瓦开始、以25瓦递增至150瓦的工作率下,比较了使用便携式热量计和SensorMedics 2900设备同步测量的VO2。每个工作率持续4分钟。所有分析均使用第3分钟和第4分钟数据的平均值。两种代谢测量系统之间有非常密切的一致性。除了在100瓦工作率时VO2差异较小(3.9%)但具有统计学意义外,VO2的所有其他差异都很小且无统计学意义。SensorMedics与便携式Aero - Sport热量计的VO2散点图显示一致性良好;相关性为r = 0.96,(估计标准误差= 3.95%)。(摘要截断于250字)

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