OBJECTIVE: To verify the accuracy of a new hand-held metabolic rate measuring device (MedGem) in quantifying postprandial energy expenditure (PP EE). MedGem measurements were compared to measurements obtained with a conventional indirect calorimeter (Delta-Trac). RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The resting metabolic rate of 15 healthy subjects was measured for 20 minutes using Delta-Trac followed by a 10-minute measurement period using MedGem. EE was again measured for 7 hours after consumption of a 2510-kJ breakfast. Measurements were read from the Delta-Trac for the initial 50 minutes of each hour followed by a single reading from the MedGem after 5 to 10 minutes of measurement. Measured EE was calculated as the average of the total measurement period for Delta-Trac and for eight readings using MedGem; PP EE was calculated as the average of all measurements obtained after breakfast consumption. RESULTS: There was no difference in resting metabolic rate between the two methods (6455.1 +/- 417.6 vs. 6468.5 +/- 337.2 kJ/d for Delta-Trac and MedGem, respectively). Measured EE and PP EE values with Delta-Trac (7019.1 +/- 400.8 and 7099.8 +/- 399.2 kJ/d, respectively) and MedGem (6775.6 +/- 372.0 and 6819.5 +/- 379.9 kJ/d, respectively) were not significantly different. There was no bias detected in any of the measurements made with MedGem compared with those of Delta-Trac. DISCUSSION: The new hand-held EE measuring device can accurately track PP EE relative to a conventional indirect calorimetry system and, therefore, provides a new opportunity to assess PP EE in research settings and large-scale trials.
OBJECTIVE: To verify the accuracy of a new hand-held metabolic rate measuring device (MedGem) in quantifying postprandial energy expenditure (PP EE). MedGem measurements were compared to measurements obtained with a conventional indirect calorimeter (Delta-Trac). RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The resting metabolic rate of 15 healthy subjects was measured for 20 minutes using Delta-Trac followed by a 10-minute measurement period using MedGem. EE was again measured for 7 hours after consumption of a 2510-kJ breakfast. Measurements were read from the Delta-Trac for the initial 50 minutes of each hour followed by a single reading from the MedGem after 5 to 10 minutes of measurement. Measured EE was calculated as the average of the total measurement period for Delta-Trac and for eight readings using MedGem; PP EE was calculated as the average of all measurements obtained after breakfast consumption. RESULTS: There was no difference in resting metabolic rate between the two methods (6455.1 +/- 417.6 vs. 6468.5 +/- 337.2 kJ/d for Delta-Trac and MedGem, respectively). Measured EE and PP EE values with Delta-Trac (7019.1 +/- 400.8 and 7099.8 +/- 399.2 kJ/d, respectively) and MedGem (6775.6 +/- 372.0 and 6819.5 +/- 379.9 kJ/d, respectively) were not significantly different. There was no bias detected in any of the measurements made with MedGem compared with those of Delta-Trac. DISCUSSION: The new hand-held EE measuring device can accurately track PP EE relative to a conventional indirect calorimetry system and, therefore, provides a new opportunity to assess PP EE in research settings and large-scale trials.
Authors: Sepideh Kaviani; Dale A Schoeller; Eric Ravussin; Edward L Melanson; Sarah T Henes; Lara R Dugas; Ronald E Dechert; George Mitri; Paul F M Schoffelen; Pim Gubbels; Asa Tornberg; Stephen Garland; Marco Akkermans; Jamie A Cooper Journal: Nutr Clin Pract Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 3.080
Authors: Jamie A Cooper; Abigail C Watras; Matthew J O'Brien; Amy Luke; Jennifer R Dobratz; Carrie P Earthman; Dale A Schoeller Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 2009-01