Background: Indirect calorimetry measured via the traditional indirect calorimeter is considered the “gold standard” for determining resting metabolic rate (RMR). Portable devices for assessing RMR are a less expensive option for measuring RMR in the clinical setting. This pilot study tested the reliability and validity of a portable device for measuring RMR, specifically in overweight and obese adolescents. Materials and Methods: Participants aged 17–19 years (n = 19) and ≥85th percentile on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention body mass index growth curves for age and sex were recruited from a university campus. Participants completed testing on a traditional indirect calorimeter and a portable indirect calorimeter in a randomized order on 2 separate testing days. Results: A paired samples t test comparing the means of the portable device and the traditional indirect calorimeter found no significant difference (P = .22). The test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient for assessing RMR was 0.91, indicating reliability of the portable indirect calorimeter. Compared with measured RMR, the Mifflin–St Jeor equation demonstrated 37% accuracy, and the Molnar equation demonstrated 57% accuracy. Conclusion: This pilot study found portable indirect calorimetry to be reliable and valid for assessing RMR in an overweight and obese adolescent population. In addition, this study indicates that portable indirect calorimetry may be an acceptable option for assessing RMR in this population compared with the traditional indirect calorimeter or predictive equations.
CompherCFrankenfieldDKeimNRoth-YouseyL. Best practice methods to apply to measurement of resting metabolic rate in adults: a systematic review. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006;106:881-903.
2.
HipskindPGlassCCharltonDNowakDDasarathyS. Do handheld calorimeters have a role in the assessment of nutrition needs of hospitalized patients? A systematic review of the literature. Nutr Clin Pract. 2011;26:426-433.
3.
Energy and protein requirements: report of a joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Committee. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1985;724:1-206.
4.
SchofieldWN. Predicting basal metabolic rate, new standards and review of previous work. Hum Nutr Clin Nutr. 1985;39(suppl):5-41.
5.
Institute for Medicine of the National Academies, Food and Nutrition Board. Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein and Amino Acids. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005.
6.
MolnarDJegesSErhardtEShutzY. Measured and predicted resting metabolic rate in obese and non-obese adolescents. J Pediatr. 1995;127(4):571-577.
7.
LazzerSAgostiFDe ColASartorioA. Development of cross-validation of predictive equations for estimating energy expenditure in severely obese Caucasian children and adolescents. Br J Nutr. 2006;96(5):973-979.
8.
HofsteengeGHChinapawMJMDelemarre-van de WaalHAWeijsPJM. Validation of predictive equations for resting energy expenditure in obese adolescents. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;91:1244-1254.
9.
HenesSTCummingsDMHicknerRC. Comparison of predictive equations and measured resting energy expenditure among obese youth attending a pediatric healthy weight clinic: one size does not fit all. Nutr Clin Pract. 2013;28(5):617-624.
10.
KleinCJVillavicencoSASchweitzerABethepuJSHoffmanHJMirzaNM. Energy prediction equations are inadequate for obese Hispanic youth. J Am Diet Assoc. 2011;111:1204-1210.
11.
MarraMMontagneseCSammarcoR. Accuracy of predictive equations for estimating resting energy expenditure in obese adolescents. J Pediatr. 2015;166(6):1390-1396.
12.
NiemanDCAustinMDChilcoteSMBenezraL. Validation of a new handheld device for measuring resting metabolic rate and oxygen consumption in children. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2005;15(2):186-194.
13.
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Pediatric weight management guidelines, major recommendations: recommendations summary, pediatric weight management determination of total energy expenditure. Evidence Analysis Library. http://www.andeal.org/template.cfm?template=guide_summary&key=1457. Accessed May 31, 2015.
14.
SunSReynoldsJErcegDN. Validation of the ReeVue™ and the CardioCoachCo2™ metabolic systems for measuring resting energy expenditure. Med Sci Sport Exerc. 2009;41(suppl 15):42.
GlassCHipskindPColeDLobezRDasarathyS. Handheld calorimeter is a valid instrument to quantify resting energy expenditure in hospitalized cirrhotic patients: a prospective study. Nutr Clin Pract. 2012;27:677-688.
22.
StewartCLGoodyCMBransonR. Comparison of two systems of measuring energy expenditure. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2005;29:212-217.
23.
CompherCHiseMSternbergAKinosianBP. Comparison between MedGem and Deltatrac resting metabolic rate measurements. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005;59:1136-1141.
24.
HlynskyJBirminghamCLJohnstonMGritznerS. The agreement between the MedGem indirect calorimeter and a standard indirect calorimeter in anorexia nervosa. Eating Weight Disord. 2005;10:e83-e87.
25.
FrankenfieldDCColemanA. An evaluation of a handheld indirect calorimeter against a standard calorimeter in obese and non-obese adults. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2013;13:652-658.
HoldyK. Monitoring energy metabolism with indirect calorimetry: instruments, interpretation, and clinical application. Nutr Clin Pract. 2004;19:447-454.
28.
BeijsCSchepGBredaEWijnPFPulCV. Accuracy and precision of CPET equipment: a comparison of breath-by-breath and mixing chamber systems. J Med Eng Technol. 2013;37(1):35-42.
29.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC growth charts: individual growth charts—body mass index (BMI) for age and gender. http://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/clinical_charts.htm. Accessed May 31, 2015.
30.
NorrisSRSmithDJ. Examination of the performance of three metabolic measurement systems [abstract no.1493]. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999;31(5)(suppl):S302.
31.
BlondEMaitrepierreCNormandSSothierMRothHLavilleM. A new indirect calorimeter is accurate and reliable for measuring basal energy expenditure, thermic effect of food, and substrate oxidation in obese and healthy subjects. e-SPEN. 2011;6:e7-15.
32.
KORR™ Medical Technologies, Inc. ReeVue™ Indirect Calorimeter Model 8100: User Manual. Salt Lake City, UT: KORR Medical Technologies; 2011:1-52.
33.
NeimanDCAustinMDBenezraL. Validation of Cosmed’s FitMate™ in measuring oxygen consumption and estimating resting metabolic rate. Res Sports Med. 2006;14:89-86.
34.
NeimanDCLasassaoHAustinMDPearceSMcInnisTUnickJ. Validation of Cosmed’s FitMate in measuring exercise metabolism. Res Sports Med. 2007;15(1):67-75.
35.
CarfagnoDGYusinJKnowltonL. Metabolic testing in the office. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2008;7(3):163-170.
36.
FrankenfieldDRoth-YouseyLCompherC. Comparison of predictive equations for resting metabolic rate in healthy nonobese and obese adults: a systematic review. J Am Diet Assoc. 2005;105:775-789.
37.
MifflinMDJeorSTHillLAScottBJDaughertySAKohYO. A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990;51:241-247.
38.
BlandJMAltmanDG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8:135-160.
39.
Van LoanMD. Do hand-held calorimeters provide reliable and accurate estimates of resting metabolic rate?J Am Coll Nutr. 2007;26(6):625-629.
40.
SpearsKEHyunsookKBehallKMConwayJM. Hand-held indirect calorimeter offers advantages compared with predictive equations, in a group of overweight women, to determine resting energy expenditures and estimated total energy expenditures during research screening. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109:836-845.
41.
ZieglarJRothpletz-PugliaPTouger-DeckerR. Resting energy expenditure in overweight and obese adults: agreement between indirect calorimetry and predictive formulas. Top Clin Nutr. 2010;25(2):180-187.
