Dharini M Bhammar1,2, Beverley Adams-Huet3, Tony G Babb2. 1. Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, School of Integrated Health Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV. 2. Institute for Exercise and Environmental Medicine, Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas and UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX. 3. Department of Population Health and Data Sciences, Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Without consideration for the effects of fat mass, there could be an underestimation of cardiorespiratory fitness in children with obesity leading to a clinical diagnosis of deconditioning and resulting in unrealistic training goals and limitation of physical activities. The purpose of this study was to identify methods of quantifying cardiorespiratory fitness that were less influenced by fat mass. METHODS: Fifty-three children, 27 with obesity (10.9 ± 1.0 yr) and 26 without obesity (11.0 ± 1.0 yr), volunteered for this study. Maximal oxygen uptake, an indicator of cardiorespiratory fitness, was referenced to lean body mass, body mass, and predicted body mass at the 50th and 85th body mass index percentiles. RESULTS: Children with obesity carried 18 kg more fat mass and 7 kg more lean body mass compared with children without obesity. Cardiorespiratory fitness based on lean body mass, body mass, and predicted body mass at the 85th percentile was lower in children with obesity compared with children without obesity (P < 0.001). Differences in cardiorespiratory fitness based on predicted body mass at the 50th percentile between children with and without obesity did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.84). Fat mass influenced cardiorespiratory fitness least when referenced to lean body mass or predicted body mass at the 50th percentile (R < 0.26) in contrast to when it was referenced to body mass or predicted body mass at the 85th percentile (R > 0.37). CONCLUSION: Quantifying cardiorespiratory fitness based on lean body mass or predicted body mass at the 50th percentile could be useful for estimating fitness levels in children with obesity.
PURPOSE: Without consideration for the effects of fat mass, there could be an underestimation of cardiorespiratory fitness in children with obesity leading to a clinical diagnosis of deconditioning and resulting in unrealistic training goals and limitation of physical activities. The purpose of this study was to identify methods of quantifying cardiorespiratory fitness that were less influenced by fat mass. METHODS: Fifty-three children, 27 with obesity (10.9 ± 1.0 yr) and 26 without obesity (11.0 ± 1.0 yr), volunteered for this study. Maximal oxygen uptake, an indicator of cardiorespiratory fitness, was referenced to lean body mass, body mass, and predicted body mass at the 50th and 85th body mass index percentiles. RESULTS:Children with obesity carried 18 kg more fat mass and 7 kg more lean body mass compared with children without obesity. Cardiorespiratory fitness based on lean body mass, body mass, and predicted body mass at the 85th percentile was lower in children with obesity compared with children without obesity (P < 0.001). Differences in cardiorespiratory fitness based on predicted body mass at the 50th percentile between children with and without obesity did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.84). Fat mass influenced cardiorespiratory fitness least when referenced to lean body mass or predicted body mass at the 50th percentile (R < 0.26) in contrast to when it was referenced to body mass or predicted body mass at the 85th percentile (R > 0.37). CONCLUSION: Quantifying cardiorespiratory fitness based on lean body mass or predicted body mass at the 50th percentile could be useful for estimating fitness levels in children with obesity.
Authors: Marco Guazzi; Ross Arena; Martin Halle; Massimo F Piepoli; Jonathan Myers; Carl J Lavie Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: K Savonen; B Krachler; M Hassinen; P Komulainen; V Kiviniemi; T A Lakka; R Rauramaa Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2011-11-22 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Tuomo Tompuri; Niina Lintu; Kai Savonen; Tomi Laitinen; David Laaksonen; Jarmo Jääskeläinen; Timo A Lakka Journal: Clin Physiol Funct Imaging Date: 2014-08-27 Impact factor: 2.273
Authors: Aviva B Sopher; John C Thornton; Jack Wang; Richard N Pierson; Steven B Heymsfield; Mary Horlick Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Lars Bo Andersen; Jeppe Bo Lauersen; Jan Christian Brønd; Sigmund Alfred Anderssen; Luis B Sardinha; Jostein Steene-Johannessen; Robert G McMurray; Mauro V G Barros; Susi Kriemler; Niels Christian Møller; Anna Bugge; Peter Lund Kristensen; Mathias Ried-Larsen; Anders Grøntved; Ulf Ekelund Journal: J Diabetes Res Date: 2015-04-06 Impact factor: 4.011
Authors: Joel Blanchard; Samuel Blais; Philippe Chetaille; Michele Bisson; François P Counil; Thelma Huard-Girard; Jade Berbari; Pierre Boulay; Frederic Dallaire Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Daniel P Wilhite; Dharini M Bhammar; Bryce N Balmain; Tanya Martinez-Fernandez; Tony G Babb Journal: Respir Physiol Neurobiol Date: 2020-12-07 Impact factor: 1.931