The modified obstetric metabolic equivalent (MET): finding a MET that fits in pregnancy

• Published in: Journal of developmental origins of health and disease 2012-06, Vol.3 (3), p.159-165
• Main Authors: Campbell, C. G., Foster, R. C., Lanningham-Foster, L. M., Smith, K. M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Activities of daily living; Diabetes; Energy; Exercise; Fitness equipment; Food science; Metabolism; Nutrition; Obstetrics; Physical fitness; Pregnancy; Public health; Questionnaires; Sports medicine; Walking; Womens health
• ISSN: 2040-1744; 2040-1752
• DOI: 10.1017/S2040174412000025

The Compendium of Physical Activities (CPA) provides the energy expenditure (EE) for hundreds of daily activities reported in metabolic equivalents (MET). It remains to be determined if the metabolic changes of pregnancy alter the use of the CPA MET (METCPA) in this population. The energy cost of rest, activities of daily living (ADL; typing, folding laundry and sweeping) and treadmill walking [2.0, 2.5, 3.0 mph (0% incline), 3.0 mph (3% incline)] were compared with the METCPA from the 2000 and 2011 CPA in 30 pregnant women (10–14 weeks gestation) using indirect calorimetry (IC). The METCPA for each activity was compared against two measured IC values: METabsolute (3.5 ml O2/kg/min) and METratio (EEactivity/EErest). Means for both comparisons were tested by one-sample t-test. Measured MET correlated with the 2011 METCPA: METabsolute v. METCPA R 2 = 0.906, P < 0.0001; METratio v. METCPA R 2 = 0.861, P < 0.0001. Differences between measured MET values and the 2011 METCPA ranged from 16% underestimation to 48% overestimation. Using the absolute definition, the METCPA significantly overestimated the ADL (P < 0.0005); yet, no significant differences were found between walking at 0% grade and METCPA. Conversely, only folding laundry was significantly different with the ratio definition, whereas walking at a level grade was significantly underestimated (P < 0.0001). Similar observations were found using the 2000 CPA. The use of the METCPA to estimate EE in pregnant women can result in significant over- or underestimation, depending on the activity and the definition of the MET that is used.