Validity of basal metabolic rate prediction equations in elderly women living in an urban tropical city of Brazil

Sgambato, Michele Ribeiro; Wahrlich, Vivian; Anjos, Luiz Antônio dos

doi:10.1016/j.clnesp.2019.03.003

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Seven studies analyzed results separately by gender, with similar findings to those just described (Table S3). The only exception was the study by Sgambato et al [19] in elderly Brazilian females, which showed a remarkable overestimation for all the equations used, ranging from þ13% for the Mifflin equation [12] up to þ 30% for the Luhrmann equation [10].…”

Section: Accuracy At Group Level (Bias)mentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Mean BMI of participants ranged from 22.2 to 27.7 kg/m 2 (Table 1). In the study by Nhung et al [30] subjects had a BMI 18.5e24.9 kg/m 2 , whereas in the others papers, BMI showed a huge variability, varying from normal weight to overweight/obesity or even severe obesity [15,19,27]. In other words, elderly subjects with normal-weight, overweight and obesity were included in most study samples.…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The accuracy of predictive equations was reported by studies including between 20 and 335 elderly subjects. In Table 1 was indicated that ten studies recruited both males and females, while two only females [19,27] and two only males [18,25]. All studies enrolled elderly individual with no physical disabilities and no evidence of diseases known to affect energy expenditure or mental or neurological disorders.…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, studies considered in the present review were performed in different countries: 4 in Germany [10,16,26,31]; 3 in UK [9,25,29], and one each in Italy [15], Sweden [18], Switzerland [28], USA [27], Brazil [19], Vietnam [30] and Japan [17].…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In all the studies selected for this review, indirect calorimetry was performed for measuring REE according to the following standardized conditions: i) overnight fast (at least 10e12 h); ii) bed rest from 10 until 30 min before starting the measurement and iii) measurement of energy expenditure after an adjustment period for 10e15 min [16,27,30] until 30e40 min [9,10,15,17,18,26,28,29,31], discarding the first 5e10 min from the analysis. The metabolic carts with canopy system were: Deltatrac [10,18,25,28,31], Minato Medical Science [17], Mijnhardt Servomex [9], Vmax SensorMedics [15,16,19,26], Oxycon Delta [30] and Europa GEM [29]. In the study by Taaffe et al [27] REE was determined by indirect calorimetry but expired air was collected using Douglas bags.…”

Section: Resting Energy Expenditurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Prediction of resting energy expenditure in healthy older adults: A systematic review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background & aims: Estimates of energy requirements, based on measured or predicted resting energy expenditure (REE), are needed to avoid undernutrition or overnutrition (and their clinical consequences) in elderly subjects. The aims of this systematic review were to evaluate the prediction accuracy of REE in healthy elderly subjects and to ascertain which equation is more reliable at group level and/or individual level. Methods: Studies assessing prediction of REE in general elderly population were systematically searched using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL until March 2020. Prediction accuracy of REE was assessed at both group (bias) and individual (precision) level for each equation.Results: Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria of this systematic review. Bias was reported in 8 papers and calculated in another 5 from absolute values. There was a prevalent tendency towards an overestimation of REE across the studies. The least bias was observed for the Mifflin (À0.3%) and Harris eBenedict (þ2.6%) equations, with values above 5% for the FAO/WHO/UNU, Fredrix and Muller equations. Precision widely varied between studies for the same equation. The higher precision was observed using the HarriseBenedict equation (~70%), while the Henry and Mifflin equations provided estimates within 10% of measured values in 65% and 61% of elderly individuals, respectively. Conclusions: None of the prediction equations considered provides accurate and precise REE estimates in healthy older adults. However, the best prediction is given by the Mifflin equation at group level and by the HarriseBenedict equation at individual level. Further studies with strong quality design are needed to evaluate the variability and accuracy of REE in the elderly general population.

show abstract

Section: Accuracy At Group Level (Bias)mentioning

confidence: 89%