Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:21:02.435Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of commonly used procedures, including the doubly-labelled water technique, in the estimation of total energy expenditure of women with special reference to the significance of body fatness*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Marie Lof ,
Ulf Hannestad  and
Elisabet Forsum
Marie Lof
Affiliation:
Division of Nutrition, University of Linköping, SE-58185 Linköping, Sweden
Ulf Hannestad
Affiliation:
Division of Clinical Chemistry, Department of Biomedicine and Surgery, University of Linköping, SE-58185 Linköping, Sweden
Elisabet Forsum*
Affiliation:
Division of Nutrition, University of Linköping, SE-58185 Linköping, Sweden
*
†Corresponding author: Dr Elisabet Forsum, fax +46 13 22 47 40, email Elifo@ibk.liu.se
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

According to the report of the World Health Organization (1985), total energy expenditure (TEE) in human subjects can be calculated as BMR×physical activity level (PAL). However, other reports have pointed out limitations in the suggested procedure related to the % body fat of the subjects. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the World Health Organization (1985) procedure in thirty-four healthy women with BMI 18–39kg/m2. BMR and TEE were measured using indirect calorimetry (BMRmeas) and the doubly-labelled water method (TEEref) respectively. When assessed using the doubly-labelled water and skinfold-thickness methods, the women had 34 (sd 8) and 33 (sd 6) % body fat respectively. On the basis of guidelines provided by the World Health Organization (1985), 1·64 was selected to represent the average PAL of the women. Furthermore, PAL was also assessed by means of an accelerometer (PALacc), heart-rate recordings (PALHR) and a questionnaire (PALq). These estimates were: PALacc 1·71 (sd 0·17), PALHR 1·76 (sd 0·24), PALq 1·86 (sd 0·27). These values were lower than TEEref/BMRref, which was 1·98 (sd 0·21). BMR assessed using equations recommended by the World Health Organization (1985) (BMRpredicted) overestimated BMR by 594 (sd 431) kJ/24h. However, when TEE was calculated as BMRpredicted×PALacc, BMRpredicted×PALHR and BMRpredicted×PALq respectively, average results were in agreement with TEEref. Furthermore, TEE values based on BMRpredicted and PALacc, PALHR, PALq as well as on PAL=1·64, minus TEEref, were significantly correlated with body fatness. When the same PAL value (1·64) was used for all subjects, this correlation was particularly strong. Thus, the World Health Organization (1985) procedure may give TEE results that are biased with respect to the body fatness of subjects.

Keywords

Basal metabolic rateBody fatnessDoubly-labelled waterPhysical activity levelTotal energy expenditure
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 90 , Issue 5 , November 2003 , pp. 961 - 968
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2003

Footnotes

*

Reprints will not be available.

References

Ainsworth, B, Haskell, W, Leon, A et al. (1993) Compendium of physical activities: classification of energy costs of human physical activities. Med Sci Sports Exerc 25, 71–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ainsworth, B, Haskell, W, Whitt, M et al. (2000) Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32, S498–S516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, A (2000a) Critical evaluation of energy intake using the Goldberg cut-off for energy intake: basal metabolic rate. A practical guide to its calculation, use and limitations. Int J Obes 24, 1119–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, A (2000b) The sensitivity and specificity of the Goldberg cut-off for EI: BMR for identifying diet reports of poor validity. Eur J Clin Nutr 54, 395–404.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, A, Goldberg, G, Jebb, S, Livingstone, M, Cole, T & Prentice, A (1991) Critical evaluation of energy intake data using fundamental principles of energy physiology. 2. Evaluating the results of published surveys. Eur J Clin Nutr 45, 583–599.Google ScholarPubMed
Black, A, Prentice, A & Coward, W (1986) Use of food quotients to predict respiratory quotients for the doubly-labelled water method of measuring energy expenditure. Hum Nutr Clin Nutr 40C, 381–391.Google Scholar
Bland, I & Altman, D (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurements. Lancet 2, 307–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronstein, M, Mak, R & King, J (1996) Unexpected relationship between fat mass and basal metabolic rate in pregnant women. Br J Nutr 75, 659–668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butte, NF, Treuth, MS, Mehta, NR, Wong, WW, Hopkinson, JM & Smith, EO (2003) Energy requirements of women of reproductive age. Am J Clin Nutr 77, 630–638.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conway, J, Seale, J, Jacobs, D, Irwin, M & Ainsworth, B (2002) Comparison of energy expenditure estimates from doubly labeled water, a physical activity questionnaire, and physical activity records. Am J Clin Nutr 75, 519–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coward, WA (1988) The doubly-labelled-water ( 2H218O) method: principles and practice. Proc Nutr Soc 47, 209–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durnin, J & Womersley, J (1974) Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness: measurements on 481 men and women aged from 16 to 72 years. Br J Nutr 32, 77–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fogelholm, M, Hiilloskorpi, H, Laukkanen, R, Oja, P, Van, MArken, Lichtenbelt W & Westerterp, K (1998) Assessment of energy expenditure in overweight women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30, 1191–1197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Food and Nutrition Board and Institute of Medicine (2002) Dietary reference intakes for energy, carbohydrate, fiber, fat, fatty acids, cholesterol, protein and amino acids (macronutrients), http://www.nap.edu/books/0309085373/html, 864–867.Google Scholar
Forsum, E, Kabir, N, Sadurskis, A & Westerterp, KR (1992) Total energy expenditure of healthy Swedish women during pregnancy and lactation. Am J Clin Nutr 56, 334–342.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, G, Black, A, Jebb, S et al. (1991) Critical evaluation of energy intake data using fundamental principles of energy physiology: 1. Derivation of cut-off limits to identify under-recording. Eur J Clin Nutr 45, 569–581.Google ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, G, Prentice, A, Coward, W et al. (1993) Longitudinal assessment of energy expenditure in pregnancy by the doubly labelled water method. Am J Clin Nutr 57, 494–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haggarty, P, Valencia, M, McNeill, G et al. (1997) Energy expenditure during heavy work and its interaction with body weight. Br J Nutr 77, 359–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, G, Buskirk, E, Lindsay, Carter J et al. (1988) Skinfold thicknesses and measurement technique. In Anthropometric Standardization Reference Manual, pp. 55–80 [Lohman, T, Roche, A, Martorell, R, editors]. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Books.Google Scholar
Hassard, T (1991) Understanding Biostatistics. St Louis, MO: Mosby-Year Book.Google Scholar
Hill, R & Davies, P (2001) The validity of self-reported energy intake as determined using the doubly labelled water technique. Br J Nutr 85, 415–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howell, W, Earthman, C, Reid, P, Delaney, J & Houtkooper, L (1999) Doubly labeled water validation of the Compendium of Physical Activities in lean and obese college women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 31, S142 Abstr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Obesity Task Force (2003) Body mass index distribution: age-standardized proportions of selected categories in MONICA populations age 35–65 years, data collected 1983–1986. http://www.iuns.org/features/obesity/tabfig.htmlGoogle Scholar
Johansson, G, Wikman, A, Ahrén, A-M, Hallmans, G & Johansson, I (2001) Underreporting of energy intake in repeated 24-hour recalls related to gender, age, weight status, day of interview, educational level, reported food intake, smoking habits and area of living. Public Health Nutr 4, 919–927.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johansson, L, Solvoll, K, Bjorneoe, G & Drevon, C (1998) Under- and overreporting of energy intake related to weight status and lifestyle in a nationwide sample. Am J Clin Nutr 68, 266–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livingstone, M, Prentice, A, Coward, W et al. (1990) Simultaneous measurement of free-living energy expenditure by the doubly labeled water method and heart-rate monitoring. Am J Clin Nutr 52, 59–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Board of Health and Welfare (2002) Yearbook of Health and Medical Care. Stockholm: Ekonomi-Print.Google Scholar
Racette, SB, Schoeller, DA & Kushner, RF (1995) Comparison of heart rate and physical activity recall with doubly labeled water in obese women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 27, 126–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rising, R, Harper, T, Fontvielle, AM, Ferraro, RT, Spraul, M & Ravussin, E (1994) Determinants of total daily energy expenditure: variability in physical activity. Am J Clin Nutr 59, 800–804.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siri, W (1961) Body composition from fluid spaces and density: an analysis of methods. In Techniques for Measuring Body Composition, pp. 223–244 [Brozek, J, Henschel, A, editors]. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Speakman, J (1997) Calculation. In Doubly Labelled Water: Theory and Practice, pp. 293–344. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Staten, L.K, Taren, DL & Howell, WH et al. (2001) Validation of the Arizona Activity Frequency Questionnaire using doubly labeled water. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33, 1959–1967.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thielecke, F & Noack, R (1997) Evaluation of an automated equilibration technique for deuterium/hydrogen isotope ratio measurements with respect to assessing total energy expenditure by the doubly labelled water method. J Mass Spectrom 32, 323–327.3.0.CO;2-X>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, JBV (1949) New method for calculating metabolic rate with special reference to protein metabolism. J Physiol 109, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization (1985) Energy and Protein Requirements. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. Technical Report Series no. 724 Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar