TY - JOUR
T1 - Validity of predictive equations for resting metabolic rate in healthy humans
JF - Clinical Science
JO - Clin Sci
DO - 10.1042/CS20180317
SP - CS20180317
AU - Galgani, Jose E.
AU - Castro-Sepulveda, Mauricio
AU - Perez-Luco, Cristian
AU - Fernández-Verdejo, Rodrigo
Y1 - 2018/07/02
UR - http://www.clinsci.org/content/early/2018/07/02/CS20180317.abstract
N2 - Background: There are several predictive equations for estimating resting metabolic rate (RMR) in healthy humans. Concordance of these equations against measured RMR is variable, and often dependent on the extent of RMR. Part of the discrepancy may lie on an insufficient accuracy of metabolic carts, but this accuracy can be improved through a correction procedure. Objective: To determine the validity of predictive RMR equations by comparing them against measured and corrected (i.e. the reference) RMR. Methods: In 69 healthy volunteers (29 males/40 females; 32±8 y old; BMI 25.5±3.8 kg/m2), RMR was measured and then corrected by simulating gas exchange through pure gases and high-precision mass-flow regulators.RMR was predicted from 13 published equations. Bland-Altman analyses compared predicted vs. reference RMR. Results: All equations correlated well with reference RMR (r>0.67; p<0.0001), but on average, over-predicted reference RMR (89-312 kcal/d; p<0.05). Based on Bland-Altman analyses, 12 equations showed a constant bias across RMR, but the bias was not different from zero for 9 of them. Three equations stood out because the absolute difference between predicted and reference RMR was equal or lower than 200 kcal/d for >60% of individuals (Mifflin, Oxford and Müller equations). From them, only Oxford equation performed better in males and females separately. Conclusion: Oxford equation is a valid alternative to predict RMR in healthy adult humans. Gas exchange correction appears a good practice for reliable assessment of RMR.
ER -