Poor agreement between a portable armband and indirect calorimetry in the assessment of resting energy expenditure

• Published in: Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) Scotland), 2008-04, Vol.27 (2), p.307-310
• Main Authors: Bertoli, S, Posata, A, Battezzati, A, Spadafranca, A, Testolin, G, Bedogni, G
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Agreement; Algorithms; Basal Metabolism - physiology; Biological and medical sciences; Body Mass Index; Calorimetry, Indirect - methods; Calorimetry, Indirect - standards; Energy Metabolism - physiology; Feeding. Feeding behavior; Female; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Humans; Indirect calorimetry; Male; Mathematics; Medical sciences; Metabolic diseases; Monitoring, Ambulatory - instrumentation; Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods; Monitoring, Ambulatory - standards; Obesity - metabolism; Oxygen Consumption - physiology; Portable armband; Reproducibility of Results; Resting energy expenditure; Sensitivity and Specificity; Vertebrates: anatomy and physiology, studies on body, several organs or systems
• ISSN: 0261-5614; 1532-1983
• DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2007.11.005

Summary Background & aims To evaluate the agreement between resting energy expenditure (REE) estimated by a portable armband and measured by indirect calorimetry. Methods One-hundred and twenty-seven women and 42 men with a mean (SD) age of 44 (12) years and a body mass index of 30.2 (5.4) kg/m2 were studied. REE was estimated using the Sense Wear Pro 2 Armband (SWA), measured using the Sensor Medics 29 metabolic cart ( Vmax ), and estimated using Schofield's equation. The limits of agreement (LOA) and the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were used to evaluate the interchangeability of the methods. Results The LOA between REESWA and REE V max were wide in both women (−269 to 378 kcal/day) and men (−330 to 545 kcal/day) and CCC was low (0.579 in females and 0.583 in males, p < 0.0001 for both). REESchofield agreed with REE V max to a similar degree (CCC = 0.563 in females and 0.500 in males, p < 0.0001 for both). Conclusions SWA and indirect calorimetry are not interchangeable methods for the assessment of REE in normal-weight and obese subjects.