Bratteby L E, Sandhagen B, Fan H, Samuelson G
Department of Clinical Physiology, University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
Eur J Clin Nutr. 1997 Sep;51(9):585-91. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600449.
To validate the use of an activity diary and predicted BMR for assessment of daily total energy expenditure (TEE) and physical activity level (PAL = TEE/BMR) in adolescents.
TEE and PAL estimated from activity diary records kept for seven days and BMR predicted from age, gender and body weight were compared with the results of doubly labelled water (DLW) measurements and indirect calorimetry performed during the same time period.
The Unit of paediatric Physiology of the Department of Clinical Physiology, University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
Fifty randomly selected 15 y old adolescents (25 boys and 25 girls).
The mean difference between TEE estimated in all adolescents by the activity diary and by DLW methods was 1.2%. The limits of agreement (mean difference 2 s.d.) were -3.47 and 3.77 MD/d, equivalent to a coefficient of variation of 15%. The mean difference between PAL assessed by activity diary records and by DLW measurements was 0.001, and the limits of agreement between the two methods were 0.54.
The results imply that the activity diary method provides a close estimate of TEE and PAL in population groups.
验证使用活动日记和预测基础代谢率(BMR)评估青少年每日总能量消耗(TEE)和身体活动水平(PAL = TEE/BMR)的可行性。
将根据连续七天记录的活动日记估算的TEE和PAL,以及根据年龄、性别和体重预测的BMR,与同期进行的双标水(DLW)测量和间接测热法的结果进行比较。
瑞典乌普萨拉大学医院临床生理学系儿科生理学单元。
随机选取50名15岁青少年(25名男孩和25名女孩)。
通过活动日记和DLW方法估算的所有青少年的TEE平均差异为1.2%。一致性界限(平均差异±2标准差)为-3.47至3.77 MD/d,相当于变异系数为15%。通过活动日记记录和DLW测量评估的PAL平均差异为0.001,两种方法之间的一致性界限为0.54。
结果表明,活动日记法能较为准确地估算人群的TEE和PAL。