Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis to Assess Energy Expenditure in Critically Ill Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Qingru Zheng, Feng Li, Wenqi Tang, Xiaoli Huang, Shuaijun Cao, Feng Ping, Yingchuan Li, Zuoyan Zhang, Weifeng Huang
{"title":"Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis to Assess Energy Expenditure in Critically Ill Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Qingru Zheng, Feng Li, Wenqi Tang, Xiaoli Huang, Shuaijun Cao, Feng Ping, Yingchuan Li, Zuoyan Zhang, Weifeng Huang","doi":"10.4037/ajcc2024240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evaluating energy expenditure is important for establishing optimal goals for nutrition treatment. However, indirect calorimetry, the reference standard for measuring energy expenditure, is difficult to apply widely in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To test the consistency of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) relative to indirect calorimetry for evaluating energy expenditure in critically ill patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study of 140 critically ill adult patients was conducted. Within 24 hours of a patient being transferred to the intensive care unit, trained researchers assessed the patient's energy expenditure by use of BIA and indirect calorimetry simultaneously. Consistency of the 2 measurements was detected by intraclass correlation coefficients with a 2-way random-effects model. Factors affecting consistency were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median energy expenditure measured by indirect calorimetry was 1430.0 kcal/d (IQR, 1190.5-1650.8 kcal/d). Median energy expenditure measured by BIA was 1407.0 kcal/d (IQR, 1248.5-1563.5 kcal/d). The correlation coefficient between indirect calorimetry and BIA was 0.813 (95% CI, 0.748-0.862; P < .001). The consistency of the 2 measurements was lower in patients with comorbidities than in those without (P = .004).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results of BIA were highly consistent with indirect calorimetry assessments of energy expenditure in critically ill patients. Few factors except comorbidity affect the accuracy of BIA when assessing energy expenditure. Therefore, as a low-cost, easy-to-use, and noninvasive method, BIA is a valuable clinical tool for assessing energy expenditure in critically ill patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":7607,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Critical Care","volume":"33 5","pages":"382-389"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2024240","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Evaluating energy expenditure is important for establishing optimal goals for nutrition treatment. However, indirect calorimetry, the reference standard for measuring energy expenditure, is difficult to apply widely in clinical practice.

Objective: To test the consistency of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) relative to indirect calorimetry for evaluating energy expenditure in critically ill patients.

Methods: A cross-sectional study of 140 critically ill adult patients was conducted. Within 24 hours of a patient being transferred to the intensive care unit, trained researchers assessed the patient's energy expenditure by use of BIA and indirect calorimetry simultaneously. Consistency of the 2 measurements was detected by intraclass correlation coefficients with a 2-way random-effects model. Factors affecting consistency were analyzed.

Results: Median energy expenditure measured by indirect calorimetry was 1430.0 kcal/d (IQR, 1190.5-1650.8 kcal/d). Median energy expenditure measured by BIA was 1407.0 kcal/d (IQR, 1248.5-1563.5 kcal/d). The correlation coefficient between indirect calorimetry and BIA was 0.813 (95% CI, 0.748-0.862; P < .001). The consistency of the 2 measurements was lower in patients with comorbidities than in those without (P = .004).

Conclusions: Results of BIA were highly consistent with indirect calorimetry assessments of energy expenditure in critically ill patients. Few factors except comorbidity affect the accuracy of BIA when assessing energy expenditure. Therefore, as a low-cost, easy-to-use, and noninvasive method, BIA is a valuable clinical tool for assessing energy expenditure in critically ill patients.

生物电阻抗分析评估重症患者的能量消耗:一项横断面研究
背景:评估能量消耗对于确定最佳营养治疗目标非常重要。然而,间接热量计作为测量能量消耗的参考标准,很难在临床实践中广泛应用:目的:测试生物电阻抗分析(BIA)与间接热量计在评估重症患者能量消耗方面的一致性:对 140 名成年重症患者进行了横断面研究。在患者转入重症监护室的 24 小时内,训练有素的研究人员同时使用 BIA 和间接热量计评估患者的能量消耗。通过类内相关系数和双向随机效应模型检测这两种测量方法的一致性。对影响一致性的因素进行了分析:间接热量计测量的能量消耗中位数为 1430.0 千卡/天(IQR,1190.5-1650.8 千卡/天)。BIA 测量的能量消耗中位数为 1407.0 千卡/天(IQR,1248.5-1563.5 千卡/天)。间接热量测定法与 BIA 的相关系数为 0.813 (95% CI, 0.748-0.862; P < .001)。有合并症的患者与无合并症的患者相比,两种测量方法的一致性较低(P = .004):结论:BIA 与间接热量计对重症患者能量消耗的评估结果高度一致。在评估能量消耗时,除合并症外,几乎没有其他因素会影响 BIA 的准确性。因此,作为一种低成本、易于使用且无创的方法,BIA 是评估危重病人能量消耗的重要临床工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
3.70%
发文量
103
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The editors of the American Journal of Critical Care (AJCC) invite authors to submit original manuscripts describing investigations, advances, or observations from all specialties related to the care of critically and acutely ill patients. Papers promoting collaborative practice and research are encouraged. Manuscripts will be considered on the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere and have been submitted solely to AJCC.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信