Do Hand-Held Calorimeters Provide Reliable and Accurate Estimates of Resting Metabolic Rate?

@article{citeulike:2214573, abstract = {This paper provides an overview of a new technique for indirect calorimetry and the assessment of resting metabolic rate. Information from the research literature includes findings on the reliability and validity of a new hand-held indirect calorimeter as well as use in clinical and field settings. Research findings to date are of mixed results. The MedGem instrument has provided more consistent results when compared to the Douglas bag method of measuring metabolic rate. The BodyGem instrument has been shown to be less accurate when compared to standard metabolic carts. Furthermore, when the Body Gem has been used with clinical patients or with under nourished individuals the results have not been acceptable. Overall, there is not a large enough body of evidence to definitively support the use of these hand-held devices for assessment of metabolic rate in a wide variety of clinical or research environments.}, author = {Van Loan, Marta D. }, citeulike-article-id = {2214573}, comment = {Indirect calorimetry is the primary method used for the assessment of energy expenditure (EE) [1]. Indirect calorimetry is also used to determine caloric requirements of individuals, monitor changes in EE as a result of dietary or exercise interventions, illness or disease progression. A major component of EE is resting metabolic rate (RMR) which represents approximately 60–70\% of daily EE [2]. RMR is calculated from measurements of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production and can also be used to evaluate substrate utilization. Information regarding changes in RMR is important in clinical settings when establishment of caloric requirements is important for recovery from illnesses. Energy cost of physical activity can also be measured using indirect calorimetry [3]. Recently a new hand-held device for determination of RMR has been developed. This device, developed by HealthETech [4], comes in two models: the BodyGemTM (BG) and the MedGemTM (MG). These devices are small, portable, easy to use and are relatively inexpensive compared to traditional metabolic carts. To date there is a limited number of research reports comparing the use of either model with the traditional metabolic cart as the reference method. Furthermore, the results using these devices have been inconsistent. Therefore, it is the purpose of this review to provide an overview of the most recent research findings using the hand-held indirect calorimeters developed by HealthETech. Finally, more investigations are needed to examine the reliability and validity of the BodyGem and MedGem instruments especially with individuals of various body sizes, under a variety of clinical conditions and with different levels of light activity such as desk work, walking, standing, watching television, and playing computer games, to name a few. }, journal = {J Am Coll Nutr}, keywords = {bmr, lifestyle, metabolism}, month = {December}, number = {6}, pages = {625--629}, posted-at = {2008-01-10 14:34:20}, priority = {2}, title = {Do Hand-Held Calorimeters Provide Reliable and Accurate Estimates of Resting Metabolic Rate?}, url = {http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/abstract/26/6/625}, volume = {26}, year = {2007} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:2214573 L3 - citeulike-article-id:2214573 TI - Do Hand-Held Calorimeters Provide Reliable and Accurate Estimates of Resting Metabolic Rate? JF - J Am Coll Nutr VL - 26 IS - 6 SP - 625 EP - 629 N2 - This paper provides an overview of a new technique for indirect calorimetry and the assessment of resting metabolic rate. Information from the research literature includes findings on the reliability and validity of a new hand-held indirect calorimeter as well as use in clinical and field settings. Research findings to date are of mixed results. The MedGem instrument has provided more consistent results when compared to the Douglas bag method of measuring metabolic rate. The BodyGem instrument has been shown to be less accurate when compared to standard metabolic carts. Furthermore, when the Body Gem has been used with clinical patients or with under nourished individuals the results have not been acceptable. Overall, there is not a large enough body of evidence to definitively support the use of these hand-held devices for assessment of metabolic rate in a wide variety of clinical or research environments. KW - bmr KW - lifestyle KW - metabolism N1 - Indirect calorimetry is the primary method used for the assessment of energy expenditure (EE) [1]. Indirect calorimetry is also used to determine caloric requirements of individuals, monitor changes in EE as a result of dietary or exercise interventions, illness or disease progression. A major component of EE is resting metabolic rate (RMR) which represents approximately 60–70% of daily EE [2]. RMR is calculated from measurements of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production and can also be used to evaluate substrate utilization. Information regarding changes in RMR is important in clinical settings when establishment of caloric requirements is important for recovery from illnesses. Energy cost of physical activity can also be measured using indirect calorimetry [3]. Recently a new hand-held device for determination of RMR has been developed. This device, developed by HealthETech [4], comes in two models: the BodyGemTM (BG) and the MedGemTM (MG). These devices are small, portable, easy to use and are relatively inexpensive compared to traditional metabolic carts. To date there is a limited number of research reports comparing the use of either model with the traditional metabolic cart as the reference method. Furthermore, the results using these devices have been inconsistent. Therefore, it is the purpose of this review to provide an overview of the most recent research findings using the hand-held indirect calorimeters developed by HealthETech. Finally, more investigations are needed to examine the reliability and validity of the BodyGem and MedGem instruments especially with individuals of various body sizes, under a variety of clinical conditions and with different levels of light activity such as desk work, walking, standing, watching television, and playing computer games, to name a few. AU - Van Loan, Marta PY - 2007/12/01/ UR - http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/abstract/26/6/625 ER -