Measured and predicted resting metabolic rate in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
{"title":"Measured and predicted resting metabolic rate in patients with inflammatory bowel disease","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.nut.2024.112552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The present study aimed to compare measured and estimated resting metabolic rate (RMR) predicted by selected equations in patients with nonactive inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on an outpatient university clinic regimen.</p></div><div><h3>Research Methods &amp; Procedures</h3><p>Seventy-two adult (≥20 years) IBD patients (45 with Crohn's disease-CD) had RMR measured (<sub>m</sub>RMR) by indirect calorimetry and also estimated by predictive equations (Cunningham, Henry, Anjos et al., and Marra et al.). Body composition was assessed by DXA. Absolute Bias (estimated - <sub>m</sub>RMR) and % Bias (Bias/<sub>m</sub>RMR) were calculated. Agreement was assessed as the limit of agreement (LoA) in the Bland &amp; Altman approach.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There was no difference in age, body composition and <sub>m</sub>RMR between individuals with CD (5414.2 ± 1023.7 kJ/day) and ulcerative colitis (5443.9 ± 1008.9 kJ/day). Among the equations, only the Anjos et al.'s population-specific equation (-52.1 [642.0] kJ/day, <em>P</em> = 0.493; LoA: -1311; 1206 kJ/d) accurately estimated RMR. The equations of Marra et al. produced the highest % Bias (24.1 ± 14.8%). The Bland &amp; Altman plots showed that the range of the LoA was relatively similar for all equations. In the simple regression analysis, the model with FFM resulted in a higher coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.51 for DC 0.74 for UC) compared to the model that included BM (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.35 for DC and 0.65 for UC).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Among the equations analyzed, only Anjos et al.'s accurately estimated RMR in outpatients with nonactive IBD. However, caution is advised when applying it at the individual level, due to the wide observed LoA.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19482,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900724002016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The present study aimed to compare measured and estimated resting metabolic rate (RMR) predicted by selected equations in patients with nonactive inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on an outpatient university clinic regimen.

Research Methods & Procedures

Seventy-two adult (≥20 years) IBD patients (45 with Crohn's disease-CD) had RMR measured (mRMR) by indirect calorimetry and also estimated by predictive equations (Cunningham, Henry, Anjos et al., and Marra et al.). Body composition was assessed by DXA. Absolute Bias (estimated - mRMR) and % Bias (Bias/mRMR) were calculated. Agreement was assessed as the limit of agreement (LoA) in the Bland & Altman approach.

Results

There was no difference in age, body composition and mRMR between individuals with CD (5414.2 ± 1023.7 kJ/day) and ulcerative colitis (5443.9 ± 1008.9 kJ/day). Among the equations, only the Anjos et al.'s population-specific equation (-52.1 [642.0] kJ/day, P = 0.493; LoA: -1311; 1206 kJ/d) accurately estimated RMR. The equations of Marra et al. produced the highest % Bias (24.1 ± 14.8%). The Bland & Altman plots showed that the range of the LoA was relatively similar for all equations. In the simple regression analysis, the model with FFM resulted in a higher coefficient of determination (R2 = 0.51 for DC 0.74 for UC) compared to the model that included BM (R2 = 0.35 for DC and 0.65 for UC).

Conclusions

Among the equations analyzed, only Anjos et al.'s accurately estimated RMR in outpatients with nonactive IBD. However, caution is advised when applying it at the individual level, due to the wide observed LoA.

炎症性肠病患者的静息代谢率测量值和预测值。
研究目的本研究旨在比较大学门诊非活动性炎症性肠病(IBD)患者通过选定方程预测的静息代谢率(RMR)的测量值和估计值:72名成年(≥20岁)IBD患者(45名患有克罗恩病-CD)通过间接量热法测量了RMR(mRMR),并通过预测方程(Cunningham、Henry、Anjos等人和Marra等人)估算了RMR。身体成分由 DXA 评估。计算绝对偏差(估计值 - mRMR)和百分比偏差(偏差/mRMR)。根据 Bland & Altman 方法,以一致性极限(LoA)来评估一致性:CD 患者(5414.2 ± 1023.7 kJ/天)和溃疡性结肠炎患者(5443.9 ± 1008.9 kJ/天)在年龄、身体成分和 mRMR 方面没有差异。在这些方程中,只有 Anjos 等人的特定人群方程(-52.1 [642.0] kJ/天,P = 0.493;LoA:-1311;1206 kJ/天)准确估计了 RMR。Marra 等人的方程产生的偏差百分比最高(24.1 ± 14.8%)。Bland & Altman 图显示,所有方程的 LoA 范围都比较相似。在简单回归分析中,与包含 BM 的模型(R2 = 0.35(DC)和 0.65(UC))相比,包含 FFM 的模型的判定系数更高(R2 = 0.51(DC)0.74(UC)):结论:在分析的方程中,只有 Anjos 等人的方程能准确估计非活动性 IBD 门诊患者的 RMR。然而,由于观察到的 LoA 较大,在个人层面应用该方程时应谨慎。
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
Nutrition
Nutrition 医学-营养学
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.30%
发文量
300
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Nutrition has an open access mirror journal Nutrition: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. Founded by Michael M. Meguid in the early 1980''s, Nutrition presents advances in nutrition research and science, informs its readers on new and advancing technologies and data in clinical nutrition practice, encourages the application of outcomes research and meta-analyses to problems in patient-related nutrition; and seeks to help clarify and set the research, policy and practice agenda for nutrition science to enhance human well-being in the years ahead.
×
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