Hiroko Ohwada1, Takeo Nakayama2, Kazuko Ishikawa-Takata3,4, Nobuaki Iwasaki5, Yuki Kanaya6, Shigeho Tanaka3,7. 1. Department of Health and Nutrition, Yamagata Prefectural Yonezawa University of Nutrition Sciences, 6-15-1 Torimachi, Yonezawa, Yamagata, Japan. h.ohwada@yone.ac.jp. 2. Department of Health Informatics, Kyoto University School of Public Health, Yoshida Konoe-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, Kyoto, Japan. 3. Department of Nutrition and Metabolism, National Institute of Health and Nutrition, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan. 4. Faculty of Applied Biosciences, Tokyo University of Agriculture, 1-1-1 Sakuragaoka, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, Japan. 5. Department of Pediatrics, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, Ibaraki, Japan. 6. Department of Health and Nutrition, Yamagata Prefectural Yonezawa University of Nutrition Sciences, 6-15-1 Torimachi, Yonezawa, Yamagata, Japan. 7. Faculty of Nutrition, Kagawa Nutrition University, 3-9-21 Chiyoda, Sakado, Saitama, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Few studies have evaluated the total energy expenditure (TEE) of children with disabilities using the doubly labeled water (DLW) method; however, none have compared it by disability type. Furthermore, no large-scale studies have focused on the severity of motor disability (MD). We aimed to compare TEE in children with disabilities by disability type. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study design, TEE was measured using the DLW method, anthropometry, and weighted food records. The following comparisons were made: (1) TEEs among four disability types and (2) TEEs of three subgroups classified by MD based on the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS). RESULTS: In total, 256 children (138 boys; ages 6-15 years) were studied. The comparison between the four disability types for boys in all age categories revealed that TEE (kJ/d) was lowest in MD, followed by intellectual disability (ID), visual disability, and hearing disability (HD), in that order. TEE/fat-free mass (FFM) (kJ/FFMkg/d) was also lowest in MD and highest in HD. TEE (kJ/d) and TEE/FFM (kJ/FFMkg/d) were also lowest in MD and highest in HD in girls. For both boys and girls, TEE (kJ/d) and TEE/FFM (kJ/FFMkg/d) were higher in the MD subtype GMFCS I-II than in GMFCS III-IV and GMFCS V. CONCLUSIONS: TEE differed, depending on the disability type, and was the lowest in MD and highest in HD for both boys and girls. Analysis by GMFCS classification revealed that greater severity of motor dysfunction resulted in lower TEE.
OBJECTIVE: Few studies have evaluated the total energy expenditure (TEE) of children with disabilities using the doubly labeled water (DLW) method; however, none have compared it by disability type. Furthermore, no large-scale studies have focused on the severity of motor disability (MD). We aimed to compare TEE in children with disabilities by disability type. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study design, TEE was measured using the DLW method, anthropometry, and weighted food records. The following comparisons were made: (1) TEEs among four disability types and (2) TEEs of three subgroups classified by MD based on the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS). RESULTS: In total, 256 children (138 boys; ages 6-15 years) were studied. The comparison between the four disability types for boys in all age categories revealed that TEE (kJ/d) was lowest in MD, followed by intellectual disability (ID), visual disability, and hearing disability (HD), in that order. TEE/fat-free mass (FFM) (kJ/FFMkg/d) was also lowest in MD and highest in HD. TEE (kJ/d) and TEE/FFM (kJ/FFMkg/d) were also lowest in MD and highest in HD in girls. For both boys and girls, TEE (kJ/d) and TEE/FFM (kJ/FFMkg/d) were higher in the MD subtype GMFCS I-II than in GMFCS III-IV and GMFCS V. CONCLUSIONS: TEE differed, depending on the disability type, and was the lowest in MD and highest in HD for both boys and girls. Analysis by GMFCS classification revealed that greater severity of motor dysfunction resulted in lower TEE.
Authors: Michele Polfuss; Kathleen J Sawin; Paula E Papanek; Linda Bandini; Bethany Forseth; Andrea Moosreiner; Kimberley Zvara; Dale A Schoeller Journal: Disabil Health J Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 2.554
Authors: George A Brooks; Nancy F Butte; William M Rand; Jean-Pierre Flatt; Benjamin Caballero Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 7.045