Validation of an Armband to Measure Daily Energy Expenditure in Older Adults
Validation of an Armband to Measure Daily Energy Expenditure in Older Adults
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/gerona/glr101
复制
发表时间：
2011-10-01
影响因子：
5.1
通讯作者：
Cummings, Steven R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mackey, Dawn C.;Manini, Todd M.;Cummings, Steven R.
背景。在衰老研究中需要客观的方法来测量每日能量消耗。我们试图使用软件版本 6.1 (SWA 6.1) 和 5.1 (SWA 5.1) 确定 SenseWear Pro 臂带 (SWA) 的总能量消耗 (TEE) 和活动能量消耗 (AEE) 估计值相对于自由生活老年人的标准方法的准确性。参与者（n = 19，平均年龄 82.0 岁）佩戴 SWA 的时间平均为 +/- SD 12.5 +/- 1.1 天，包括睡觉时。在同一时期，使用双标记水评估 TEE 的标准值，并使用间接量热法评估静息代谢率 (RMR) 的标准值。 AEE 计算为 0.9 TEE - RMR。结果。对于 TEE，双标记水（2,040 +/- 472 kcal/天）与 SWA 6.1（2,012 +/- 497 kcal/天，p = .593）或 SWA 5.1（2,066 +/- 474 kcal/天，p = .606）的平均值 +/- SD 值没有差异；各方法之间的个体值高度相关（SWA 6.1 r = .893，p < .001；SWA 5.1 r = .901，p < .001），并且表现出很强的一致性（SWA 6.1 组内相关系数 = .896；SWA 5.1 组内相关系数 = .904）。对于 AEE，SWA 6.1 的平均值（427 +/- 304 kcal/天）比标准值（583 +/- 242 kcal/天，p = .003）低 26.8%，SWA 5.1 的平均值（475 +/- 299 kcal/天）比标准值低 18.5%（p = .021）；然而，各方法之间的个体值高度相关（SWA 6.1 r = .760，p < .001；SWA 5.1 r = .786，p < .001），并且表现出中等一致性（SWA 6.1 组内相关系数 = .645；SWA 5.1 组内相关系数 = .720）。 Bland-Altman 图未发现 TEE 或 AEE 存在系统偏差。结论。在老年人中，SWA 与 TEE 和 AEE 的标准测量值之间观察到了可接受的一致性水平。
Background. Objective methods to measure daily energy expenditure in studies of aging are needed. We sought to determine the accuracy of total energy expenditure (TEE) and activity energy expenditure (AEE) estimates from the SenseWear Pro armband (SWA) using software versions 6.1 (SWA 6.1) and 5.1 (SWA 5.1) relative to criterion methods in free-living older adults.Methods. Participants (n = 19, mean age 82.0 years) wore a SWA for a mean +/- SD 12.5 +/- 1.1 days, including while sleeping. During this same period, criterion values for TEE were assessed with doubly labeled water and for resting metabolic rate (RMR) with indirect calorimetry. AEE was calculated as 0.9 TEE - RMR.Results. For TEE, there was no difference in mean +/- SD values from doubly labeled water (2,040 +/- 472 kcal/day) versus SWA 6.1 (2,012 +/- 497 kcal/day, p = .593) or SWA 5.1 (2,066 +/- 474 kcal/day, p = .606); individual values were highly correlated between methods (SWA 6.1 r = .893, p < .001; SWA 5.1 r = .901, p < .001) and demonstrated strong agreement (SWA 6.1 intraclass correlation coefficient = .896; SWA 5.1 intraclass correlation coefficient = .904). For AEE, mean values from SWA 6.1 (427 +/- 304 kcal/day) were lower by 26.8% than criterion values (583 +/- 242 kcal/day, p = .003), and mean values from SWA 5.1 (475 +/- 299 kcal/day) were lower by 18.5% than criterion values (p = .021); however, individual values were highly correlated between methods (SWA 6.1 r = .760, p < .001; SWA 5.1 r = .786, p < .001) and demonstrated moderate agreement (SWA 6.1 intraclass correlation coefficient = .645; SWA 5.1 intraclass correlation coefficient = .720). Bland-Altman plots identified no systematic bias for TEE or AEE.Conclusions. Acceptable levels of agreement were observed between SWA and criterion measurements of TEE and AEE in older adults.