Energy Expenditure in Lean and Obese Prepubertal Children

DeLany, James P.; Harsha, David W.; Kime, J.; Kumler, Julie; Melancon, Louis; Bray, George A.

doi:10.1002/j.1550-8528.1995.tb00009.x

Cited by 65 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our ®ndings of no differences between the groups after adjusting for body composition, agree with previous investigators 11,14,15,29 despite differences in study design and methodology. Two cross-sectional studies 11,29 examined the relationship between EE vs fatness in infants and children, and reported no relationships between TEE, BMR or activity EE and fatness in children or fatness in parents.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…10±13 A low physical activity EE, only 16.7% of TEE, was reported in children aged 5 y. 10 Two studies comparing obese and nonobese children have reported no signi®cant differences in TEE (measured by DLW), physical activity EE or PAL in either prepubertal children 14 or adolescents. 15 However, both studies suggested that the obese children had a reduced activity level.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Energy expenditure and physical fitness in overweight vs non-overweight prepubertal girls

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether overweight children have lower physical activity energy expenditure (EE) and ®tness levels than non-overweight children. STUDY DESIGN: Twenty-four healthy girls aged 7±10 y were divided into overweight ( b 95th percentile weight-forheight) and non-overweight (10±90th percentile) groups. Basal metabolic rate (BMR), sleeping metabolic rate (SMR), 24 h sedentary EE (SEE) and total EE (TEE) were measured by room respiration calorimetry and doubly labelled water. Physical activity EE and physical activity level (PAL) were calculated. Fitness (VO 2 peak) was measured by a treadmill exercise test. RESULTS: The overweight group had signi®cantly higher body weight, percent fat, fat mass and fat-free mass (FFM) (P`0.001). The overweight girls had higher BMR, SMR, SEE and TEE (P`0.001), but not after adjustment for FFM. Physical activity EE and PAL were not signi®cantly different between groups. After adjusting for FFM or weight, submaximal and peak VO 2 were not signi®cantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that these overweight girls do not have lower physical activity EE or ®tness levels than the non-overweight prepubertal girls, however, the rather high body fat of the non-overweight group may have precluded us from ®nding any differences between groups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy expenditure and physical fitness in overweight vs non-overweight prepubertal girls

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several crosssectional studies in pre-pubertal children have shown that energy expenditure, including physical activity energy expenditure, is similar in lean vs obese children, especially after controlling for differences in body composition. 91,92 Children of obese vs lean parents have also been examined as a model of`preobesity'. One study showed that children of obese parents had a reduced energy expenditure, including physical activity energy expenditure, 93 whereas another study did not.…”

Section: Physical Activity and Obesitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of physical activity in the prevention of obesity in children

1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing prevalence of childhood obesity and its concomitant health risks justify widespread efforts toward prevention. Although both diet and physical activity have been emphasized as appropriate interventions, the current paper focuses on the role of physical activity in obesity prevention. Children's levels of physical activity are highly variable, and may be in¯uenced by a multitude of factors including physiological, psychological, sociocultural and environmental determinants. Although the relationship between physical activity and obesity is controversial and the protective mechanism unclear, physical activity is hypothesized to protect individuals from the development of obesity by increasing energy expenditure and resting metabolic rate (RMR) and leading to a favourable fuel utilization. The bene®cial effect of physical activity in children is supported by controlled exercise intervention programs. Several broad-based public health interventions designed to increase children's levels of physical activity have been implemented in schools, families and communities, with results suggesting promising strategies for the prevention of childhood obesity. It is likely that successful prevention of childhood obesity through physical activity promotion will involve theory-based, culturally appropriate school, family and community interventions. Through policy changes, environmental planning and educational efforts in schools and communities, increased opportunities and encouragement for physical activity can be provided.

show abstract

“…8 Previous research on physical activity in paediatric obesity has focused on non-clinical samples, comparing habitual physical activity or energy expenditure in obese and nonobese children and adolescents. [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Most of these studies found lower levels of physical activity and *PAL (TEE/REE) in obese children and adolescents relative to their lean counterparts. [9][10][11][12][14][15][16] The few studies that have compared objec-tively measured sedentary behaviour in non-clinical samples of obese and lean children have reported inconsistent results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Most of these studies found lower levels of physical activity and *PAL (TEE/REE) in obese children and adolescents relative to their lean counterparts. [9][10][11][12][14][15][16] The few studies that have compared objec-tively measured sedentary behaviour in non-clinical samples of obese and lean children have reported inconsistent results. 10,14,15 The aims of this study were therefore to use accelerometry to (1) measure habitual physical activity and sedentary behaviour objectively in a clinical sample of obese children aged 5-11 years; (2) compare the results with a sample of ageand sex-matched non-obese control children.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitual physical activity and sedentary behaviour in a clinical sample of obese children

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To objectively measure habitual physical activity and sedentary behaviour in a clinical sample of obese children and to compare with age-and sex-matched non-obese controls. Design: Pairwise comparison of obese children matched for age and gender with non-obese controls. Subjects: A total of 116 obese children (body mass index (BMI)X98th centile) and 53 non-obese control children (BMIo85th centile). Controls were matched with 53 of the obese children (mean age 8.6, s.d. 2.0 years; 25 M and 28 F). Measurement: Habitual physical activity and sedentary behaviour were measured over a 7-day period using CSA accelerometers. Total physical activity (mean accelerometry count per minute (c.p.m.)), percentage of monitored time in sedentary behaviour, light and moderate to vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA) were compared. Results: Obese children (n ¼ 116) spent on average 80.4% of their monitored time in sedentary behaviour and 2.5% of their monitored time in MVPA. Total activity (mean c.p.m.) was significantly higher in the non-obese group (n ¼ 53) than the obese group (n ¼ 53), 729 vs 648 c.p.m.; 95% confidence interval (CI) 7, 155. Time spent in sedentary behaviour averaged 80.9% (s.d. 6.6) in the obese group and 79.3% (s.d. 6.2) in the non-obese group, with no significant between-group difference (95% CI À3.9, 0.6). Light intensity activity was similar in the obese and non-obese groups (15.9 vs 17.3%; 95% CI À0.3, 3.0). Participation in MVPA was significantly higher in the non-obese vs obese group (3.9 vs 2.4%; 95% CI 0.6, 2.0). Conclusion: This study supports the hypothesis that a clinical sample of obese children is less physically active than non-obese children, although the difference in total activity and MVPA between the groups was small.

show abstract

Energy Expenditure in Lean and Obese Prepubertal Children

Cited by 65 publications

References 15 publications

Energy expenditure and physical fitness in overweight vs non-overweight prepubertal girls

Energy expenditure and physical fitness in overweight vs non-overweight prepubertal girls

Role of physical activity in the prevention of obesity in children

Habitual physical activity and sedentary behaviour in a clinical sample of obese children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About