Comparison of Resting Energy Expenditure Prediction Equations and Indirect Calorimetry Among Adults with Severe Obesity

IF 3.2 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Seth W Rather , Parker S Lawson , Jorin D Larsen , Dalton L Braathen , Jacob G Mabey , James D LeCheminant , Ted D Adams , Steven C Hunt , Lance E Davidson
{"title":"Comparison of Resting Energy Expenditure Prediction Equations and Indirect Calorimetry Among Adults with Severe Obesity","authors":"Seth W Rather ,&nbsp;Parker S Lawson ,&nbsp;Jorin D Larsen ,&nbsp;Dalton L Braathen ,&nbsp;Jacob G Mabey ,&nbsp;James D LeCheminant ,&nbsp;Ted D Adams ,&nbsp;Steven C Hunt ,&nbsp;Lance E Davidson","doi":"10.1016/j.cdnut.2025.107538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Proper estimations of resting energy expenditure (REE) are important for developing weight management strategies, but it is unclear which prediction equations best estimate REE for those with severe obesity.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This validation study tested 11 previously validated REE prediction equations to determine which equations estimate REE with the least bias and most precision in participants with severe obesity.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>REE was measured by indirect calorimetry in 632 females and 148 males with severe obesity from the Utah Obesity Study. A literature search was conducted to identify prediction equations designed from, validated, or commonly used in samples with severe obesity. All equations were tested on each participant. Equations were considered unbiased if mean predicted REE did not differ significantly (<em>P</em> &gt; 0.05) from measured values. Bland–Altman plots characterized bias across measured REE values for prediction equations consistent with measured values. Precision was the percentage of the sample where an equation estimate was within 10% of the measured REE. Equations were further assessed within sex and body mass index subgroups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Only the body weight-based Lazzer equations (Lazzer A) and the Horie–Waitzberg equation generated unbiased predictions across all subgroups, with bias values ranging from −68.1 to 71.6 kcal, yet Bland–Altman plots revealed systematic bias, particularly at extreme values of REE. Equations including body composition did not predict better than body weight-based equations, and no single equation predicted best in every subgroup. Precision measurements never rose above 67.8%.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Clinicians may benefit from tailoring their choice of REE prediction equation to the specific characteristics of each patient, favoring equations with lower bias and greater precision within relevant subgroups. However, because of the low precision of REE prediction equations and the systematic bias revealed at REE extremes, it is highly recommended to measure REE whenever possible.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10756,"journal":{"name":"Current Developments in Nutrition","volume":"9 10","pages":"Article 107538"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Developments in Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475299125030008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Proper estimations of resting energy expenditure (REE) are important for developing weight management strategies, but it is unclear which prediction equations best estimate REE for those with severe obesity.

Objectives

This validation study tested 11 previously validated REE prediction equations to determine which equations estimate REE with the least bias and most precision in participants with severe obesity.

Methods

REE was measured by indirect calorimetry in 632 females and 148 males with severe obesity from the Utah Obesity Study. A literature search was conducted to identify prediction equations designed from, validated, or commonly used in samples with severe obesity. All equations were tested on each participant. Equations were considered unbiased if mean predicted REE did not differ significantly (P > 0.05) from measured values. Bland–Altman plots characterized bias across measured REE values for prediction equations consistent with measured values. Precision was the percentage of the sample where an equation estimate was within 10% of the measured REE. Equations were further assessed within sex and body mass index subgroups.

Results

Only the body weight-based Lazzer equations (Lazzer A) and the Horie–Waitzberg equation generated unbiased predictions across all subgroups, with bias values ranging from −68.1 to 71.6 kcal, yet Bland–Altman plots revealed systematic bias, particularly at extreme values of REE. Equations including body composition did not predict better than body weight-based equations, and no single equation predicted best in every subgroup. Precision measurements never rose above 67.8%.

Conclusions

Clinicians may benefit from tailoring their choice of REE prediction equation to the specific characteristics of each patient, favoring equations with lower bias and greater precision within relevant subgroups. However, because of the low precision of REE prediction equations and the systematic bias revealed at REE extremes, it is highly recommended to measure REE whenever possible.
重度肥胖成人静息能量消耗预测方程与间接量热法的比较
适当估计静息能量消耗(REE)对于制定体重管理策略很重要,但目前尚不清楚哪种预测方程最能估计严重肥胖患者的REE。目的:本验证性研究测试了11个先前验证过的REE预测方程,以确定哪些方程对重度肥胖参与者的REE估计偏差最小,精度最高。方法采用间接量热法对来自犹他州肥胖研究的632名女性和148名男性重度肥胖患者进行ree测量。进行文献检索,以确定根据严重肥胖样本设计、验证或常用的预测方程。所有的方程式都在每个参与者身上进行了测试。如果平均预测REE与实测值没有显著差异(P > 0.05),则认为方程是无偏的。Bland-Altman图表征了与实测值一致的预测方程在测量REE值之间的偏差。精密度是指方程估计在测量REE值的10%以内的样品的百分比。在性别和身体质量指数亚组中进一步评估方程。结果:只有基于体重的Lazzer方程(Lazzer A)和Horie-Waitzberg方程在所有亚组中产生了无偏倚的预测,偏倚值范围为- 68.1至71.6 kcal,而Bland-Altman图显示出系统偏倚,特别是在REE的极端值处。包括身体成分的方程并不比基于体重的方程预测得更好,而且没有一个方程在每个亚组中预测得最好。测量精度从未超过67.8%。结论:临床医生可以根据每个患者的具体特征定制REE预测方程的选择,在相关亚组中倾向于低偏倚和更高精度的方程。然而,由于稀土元素预测方程的精度较低,且在稀土元素极值处显示出系统偏差,因此建议尽可能地进行稀土元素测量。
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
Current Developments in Nutrition
Current Developments in Nutrition NUTRITION & DIETETICS-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
4.20%
发文量
1327
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信