UNLABELLED: The resting energetic dispenses on postmenopausal stage should be well known in order to elaborate obesity prevention programs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the resting metabolic rate (RMR) measured by indirect calorimetry (RMRmeasured) with predictive equations (RMRestimated) and verify which preexisting equation is more indicated for this population, in inactive, postmenopausal women. DESIGN: 43 postmenopausal women volunteered for the present study. MEASUREMENTS: RMRestimated value was achieved by indirect calorimetry. The predictive equations used were: Harris-Benedict equation (HB), Henry e Ree (HR), Mifflin-St Jeor equation (MSJ), World Health Organization equation (WHO) and Female Brazilian Population (FBP). Body composition was obtained through skinfolds method. RESULTS: All equations showed significant difference values for kcal/day (p<0.00001) (HB 1313.07±73.46; HR 1310.95±81.41; MSJ 1207.93±93.17; WHO 1375.73±61.01 and FBP 1250.05±73.54 kcal/day) in relation to RMRestimated (1063.79±157.82). The WHO equation was the one which most overestimated the RMR values with a difference of more than 300 kcal/day. CONCLUSION: None of the equations to approach, in this study showed precision in the estimative of RMR, all prediction equations overestimated RMR values in Brazilians' postmenopausal women, although the MSJ predictive equation showed the greater approximation of RMRmeasured for this population.
UNLABELLED: The resting energetic dispenses on postmenopausal stage should be well known in order to elaborate obesity prevention programs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the resting metabolic rate (RMR) measured by indirect calorimetry (RMRmeasured) with predictive equations (RMRestimated) and verify which preexisting equation is more indicated for this population, in inactive, postmenopausal women. DESIGN: 43 postmenopausal women volunteered for the present study. MEASUREMENTS: RMRestimated value was achieved by indirect calorimetry. The predictive equations used were: Harris-Benedict equation (HB), Henry e Ree (HR), Mifflin-St Jeor equation (MSJ), World Health Organization equation (WHO) and Female Brazilian Population (FBP). Body composition was obtained through skinfolds method. RESULTS: All equations showed significant difference values for kcal/day (p<0.00001) (HB 1313.07±73.46; HR 1310.95±81.41; MSJ 1207.93±93.17; WHO 1375.73±61.01 and FBP 1250.05±73.54 kcal/day) in relation to RMRestimated (1063.79±157.82). The WHO equation was the one which most overestimated the RMR values with a difference of more than 300 kcal/day. CONCLUSION: None of the equations to approach, in this study showed precision in the estimative of RMR, all prediction equations overestimated RMR values in Brazilians' postmenopausal women, although the MSJ predictive equation showed the greater approximation of RMRmeasured for this population.
Authors: Marie-Eve Piché; Annie Lapointe; S John Weisnagel; Louise Corneau; André Nadeau; Jean Bergeron; Simone Lemieux Journal: Metabolism Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 8.694
Authors: Valéria Bonganha; Miguel Soares Conceição; Claudinei Ferreira dos Santos; Mara Patrícia Traína Chacon-Mikahil; Vera Aparecida Madruga Journal: Arq Bras Endocrinol Metabol Date: 2009-08
Authors: Mauricio de Sant'Anna; Leonardo Coelho Eboli; Julio Guilherme Silva; Alan Gomes Dos Santos; Michele Lourenço; Adalgiza Mafra Moreno; Gabriel Rodriguez de Freitas; Marco Orsini Journal: Neurol Int Date: 2014-11-14
Authors: Rita Ostan; Giulia Guidarelli; Enrico Giampieri; Catia Lanzarini; Agnes A M Berendsen; Olga Januszko; Amy Jennings; Noëlle Lyon; Elodie Caumon; Rachel Gillings; Ewa Sicinska; Nathalie Meunier; Edith J M Feskens; Barbara Pietruszka; Lisette C P G M de Groot; Susan Fairweather-Tait; Miriam Capri; Claudio Franceschi; Aurelia Santoro Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Rebecca T McLay-Cooke; Andrew R Gray; Lynnette M Jones; Rachael W Taylor; Paula M L Skidmore; Rachel C Brown Journal: Nutrients Date: 2017-09-13 Impact factor: 5.717