The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Measurement of total energy expenditure in grossly obese women: comparison of the bicarbonate-urea method with whole-body calorimetry and free-living doubly labelled water

Measurement of total energy expenditure in grossly obese women: comparison of the bicarbonate-urea method with whole-body calorimetry and free-living doubly labelled water
Measurement of total energy expenditure in grossly obese women: comparison of the bicarbonate-urea method with whole-body calorimetry and free-living doubly labelled water
OBJECTIVE: To establish validity of the bicarbonate-urea (BU) method against direct measurements of gaseous exchange (GE) in a whole-body indirect calorimeter and to compare BU and doubly labelled water (DLW) measurements in free-living conditions in the same group of grossly obese women.
DESIGN: Energy expenditure (EE) was estimated by the BU method over 24 h concurrently with whole-body indirect calorimetry and subsequently over 5 consecutive days at home concurrently with 14 day DLW. Six women, body mass index (BMI) 52.4±10.4 kg/m2 (s.d.), were studied.
RESULTS: Total energy expenditure (TEE) measurements by BU and GE within the metabolic chamber were not significantly different (BU=11.79±1.89 MJ/day and GE=11.64±1.86 MJ/day; mean difference, 0.25±0.49 MJ/day, P>0.05). Free-living TEE derived from BU and DLW was also similar (13.28±1.86 and 13.86±2.25 MJ/day, respectively; mean difference 0.17±1.33 MJ/day, P<0.05). The measured physical activity level (PAL) in these very obese subjects was within the range reported in other free-living studies in less obese individuals (1.62±0.14 using DLW and 1.56±0.20 using BU). The BU method was well tolerated by the subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: This study in grossly obese subjects, heavier than those participating in previous studies involving tracer methods, demonstrates validity of the BU against GE under controlled metabolic conditions, and the equivalence between BU and DLW under free-living conditions. The results suggest that both tracer methods are valid in this population group. This study also demonstrates the practicalities of using the BU method over 5 days, the longest application of the method so far.
energy expenditure, bicarbonate urea, indirect calorimetry, doubly labelled water, validation, free living
641-647
Gibney, E. R.
684b69a9-3c68-4ded-96c8-092ef62b6213
Murgatroyd, P.
ec4abf4b-7b88-4a69-9ca1-35e4c302ec18
Wright, A.
b61333ca-30c4-4786-b64d-7510229c3755
Jebb, S.
7be0d78f-94ef-4603-a100-d0fad8e08673
Elia, M.
964bf436-e623-46d6-bc3f-5dd04c9ef4c1
Gibney, E. R.
684b69a9-3c68-4ded-96c8-092ef62b6213
Murgatroyd, P.
ec4abf4b-7b88-4a69-9ca1-35e4c302ec18
Wright, A.
b61333ca-30c4-4786-b64d-7510229c3755
Jebb, S.
7be0d78f-94ef-4603-a100-d0fad8e08673
Elia, M.
964bf436-e623-46d6-bc3f-5dd04c9ef4c1

Gibney, E. R., Murgatroyd, P., Wright, A., Jebb, S. and Elia, M. (2003) Measurement of total energy expenditure in grossly obese women: comparison of the bicarbonate-urea method with whole-body calorimetry and free-living doubly labelled water. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders, 27 (6), 641-647. (doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802302).

Record type: Article

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To establish validity of the bicarbonate-urea (BU) method against direct measurements of gaseous exchange (GE) in a whole-body indirect calorimeter and to compare BU and doubly labelled water (DLW) measurements in free-living conditions in the same group of grossly obese women.
DESIGN: Energy expenditure (EE) was estimated by the BU method over 24 h concurrently with whole-body indirect calorimetry and subsequently over 5 consecutive days at home concurrently with 14 day DLW. Six women, body mass index (BMI) 52.4±10.4 kg/m2 (s.d.), were studied.
RESULTS: Total energy expenditure (TEE) measurements by BU and GE within the metabolic chamber were not significantly different (BU=11.79±1.89 MJ/day and GE=11.64±1.86 MJ/day; mean difference, 0.25±0.49 MJ/day, P>0.05). Free-living TEE derived from BU and DLW was also similar (13.28±1.86 and 13.86±2.25 MJ/day, respectively; mean difference 0.17±1.33 MJ/day, P<0.05). The measured physical activity level (PAL) in these very obese subjects was within the range reported in other free-living studies in less obese individuals (1.62±0.14 using DLW and 1.56±0.20 using BU). The BU method was well tolerated by the subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: This study in grossly obese subjects, heavier than those participating in previous studies involving tracer methods, demonstrates validity of the BU against GE under controlled metabolic conditions, and the equivalence between BU and DLW under free-living conditions. The results suggest that both tracer methods are valid in this population group. This study also demonstrates the practicalities of using the BU method over 5 days, the longest application of the method so far.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2003
Keywords: energy expenditure, bicarbonate urea, indirect calorimetry, doubly labelled water, validation, free living

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 25532
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/25532
PURE UUID: a261c210-0a13-4952-b632-3e9bfe3a2f9f

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 07 Apr 2006
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 07:03

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: E. R. Gibney
Author: P. Murgatroyd
Author: A. Wright
Author: S. Jebb
Author: M. Elia

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×