Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/54760
Citations
Scopus Web of ScienceĀ® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: Impact of indexing resting metabolic rate against fat-free mass determined by different body composition models
Author: La Forgia, J.
van der Ploeg, G.
Withers, R.
Gunn, S.
Brooks, A.
Chatterton, B.
Citation: European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2004; 58(8):1132-1141
Publisher: Nature Publishing Group
Issue Date: 2004
ISSN: 0954-3007
1476-5640
Statement of
Responsibility: 
LaForgia, J; van der Ploeg, GE; Withers, RT; Gunn, SM; Brooks, AG and Chatterton BE.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To examine the differences arising from indexing resting metabolic rate (RMR) against fat-free mass (FFM) determined using two-, three- and four-compartment body composition models. DESIGN: All RMR and body composition measurements were conducted on the same day for each subject following compliance with premeasurement protocols. SUBJECTS: Data were generated from measurements on 104 males (age 32.1+/-12.1 y (mean+/-s.d.); body mass 81.15+/-12.85 kg; height 179.5+/-6.5 cm; body fat 20.6+/-7.6%). INTERVENTIONS: Body density (BD), total body water (TBW) and bone mineral mass (BMM) were measured by hydrodensitometry, deuterium dilution and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), respectively. These measures were used to determine two (hydrodensitometry: BD; hydrometry: TBW)-, three (BD and TBW)- and four- compartment (BD, TBW and BMM) FFM values. DXA also provided three compartment derived FFM values. RMR was measured using open circuit indirect calorimetry. RESULTS: Three (body fat group: lean, moderate, high) x five (body composition determination: hydrodensitometry, hydrometry, three-compartment, DXA, four-compartment) ANOVAs were conducted on FFM and RMR kJ.kg FFM(-1).d(-1). Within-group comparisons revealed that hydrodensitometry and DXA were associated with significant (P<0.001) overestimations and underestimations of FFM and RMR kJ.kg FFM(-1).d(-1), respectively, compared with four-compartment-derived criterion values. A significant interaction (P<0.001) resulted from DXA's greater deviations from criterion values in lean subjects. While hydrometric means were not significantly (P> or =0.68) different from criterion values intraindividual differences were large (FFM: -1.5 to 2.9 kg; RMR: -6.0 to 3.2 kJ.kg FFM(-1).d(-1)). CONCLUSION: The relationship between RMR kJ.kg FFM(-1).d(-1) and exercise status would best be investigated using three (BD, TBW)- or four (BD, TBW, BMM)-compartment body composition models to determine FFM. Other models either significantly underestimate indexed RMR (hydrodensitometry, DXA) or display large intraindividual differences (hydrometry) compared with four-compartment derived criterion values. SPONSORSHIP: Australian Research Council (small grants scheme).
Keywords: Muscle, Skeletal
Adipose Tissue
Body Water
Humans
Absorptiometry, Photon
Basal Metabolism
Radioisotope Dilution Technique
Analysis of Variance
Predictive Value of Tests
Immersion
Body Composition
Energy Metabolism
Models, Biological
Adolescent
Adult
Middle Aged
Male
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601941
Description (link): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15054426
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 5
Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.