Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1995 Sep;19(9):671-7.

Daily energy expenditure in free-living conditions in obese and non-obese children: comparison of doubly labelled water (2H2(18)O) method and heart-rate monitoring

Affiliations
  • PMID: 8574279
Comparative Study

Daily energy expenditure in free-living conditions in obese and non-obese children: comparison of doubly labelled water (2H2(18)O) method and heart-rate monitoring

C Maffeis et al. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1995 Sep.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the heart-rate monitoring with the doubly labelled water (2H2(18)O) method to estimate total daily energy expenditure in obese and non-obese children.

Design: Cross sectional study of obese and normal weight children.

Subjects: 13 prepubertal children: six obese (4M, 2F, 9.1 +/- 1.5 years, 47.3 +/- 9.7 kg) and seven non-obese (3M, 4F, 9.3 +/- 0.6 years, 31.8 +/- 3.2 kg).

Measurements: Total daily energy expenditure was assessed by means of the doubly labelled water method (TEEDLW) and of heart-rate monitoring (TEEHR).

Results: TEEHR was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than TEEDLW in obese children (9.47 +/- 0.84 MJ/d vs 8.99 +/- 0.63 MJ/d) whereas it was not different in non-obese children (8.43 +/- 2.02 MJ/d vs 8.42 +/- 2.30 MJ/d, P = NS). The difference of TEE assessed by HR monitoring in the obese group averaged 6.2 +/- 4.7%. At the individual level, the degree of agreement (difference between TEEHR and TEEDLW +/- 2s.d.) was low both in obese (-0.36, 1.32 MJ/d) and in non-obese children (-1.30, 1.34 MJ/d). At the group level, the agreement between the two methods was good in nonobese children (95% c.i. for the bias:-0.59, 0.63 MJ/d) but not in obese children (0.04, 0.92 MJ/d). Duration of sleep and energy expenditure during resting and physical activity were not significantly different in the two groups. Patterns of heart-rate (or derived energy expenditure) during the day-time were similar in obese and non-obese children.

Conclusion: The HR monitoring technique provides an estimation of TEE close to that assessed by the DLW method in non-obese prepubertal children. In comparison with DLW, the HR monitoring method yields a greater TEE value in obese children.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources