HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by de Jonge, L. Articles by Ravussin, E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by de Jonge, L. Articles by Ravussin, E. Agricola Articles by de Jonge, L. Articles by Ravussin, E.

Validation study of energy expenditure and intake during calorie restriction using doubly labeled water and changes in body composition^1,2,3

¹ From the Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA (LdJ, JPD, TN, JH, LMR, and ER), and the National Institute on Aging, Bethesda, MD (ECH)

Background: Clinical trials involving calorie restriction (CR) require an assessment of adherence to a prescribed CR with the use of an objective measure of energy intake (EI).

Objective: The objective was to validate the use of energy expenditure (EE) measured by doubly labeled water (DLW), in conjunction with precise measures of body composition, to calculate an individual's EI during 30% CR.

Design: Ten participants underwent 30% CR for 3 wk. During the last week (7 d), 24-h EE was measured in a respiratory chamber and simultaneously by DLW (EE_DLW). EI was calculated from 7-d EE measured by DLW and from changes in energy stores (ES) (weight and body composition). Calculated EI was then compared with the actual EI measured in the chamber by using the following equations: calculated EI (kcal/d) = EE_DLW + ES, where ES_FM/FFM (kcal/d) = (9.3 x FM, g/d) + (1.1 x FFM, g/d), FM is fat mass, and FFM is fat-free mass.

Results: We found close agreement (R = 0.88) between EE measured in the metabolic chamber and EE_DLW during CR. Using the measured respiratory quotient, we found that the mean (±SD) EE_DLW was 1934 ± 377 kcal/d and EE measured in the metabolic chamber was 1906 ± 327 kcal/d, ie, a 1.3 ± 8.9% overestimation. EI calculated from EE_DLW and from changes in ES was 8.7 ± 36.7% higher than the actual EI provided during the chamber stay (1596 ± 656 kcal/d).

Conclusions: DLW methods can accurately estimate 24-h EE during CR. Although the mean difference between actual and calculated EIs for the group was small, we conclude that the interindividual variability was too large to provide an assessment of CR adherence on an individual basis.

Key Words: Doubly labeled water method • DLW • energy intake • body composition • metabolic chamber

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. J Moshfegh, D. G Rhodes, D. J Baer, T. Murayi, J. C Clemens, W. V Rumpler, D. R Paul, R. S Sebastian, K. J Kuczynski, L. A Ingwersen, et al. The US Department of Agriculture Automated Multiple-Pass Method reduces bias in the collection of energy intakes Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, August 1, 2008; 88(2): 324 - 332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. J. Melanson Nutrition Review: Dietary Considerations for Obesity Treatment American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, December 1, 2007; 1(6): 433 - 436. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Bowman and A. B Loucks Validation of energy intake during calorie restriction with the doubly labeled water method and changes in body composition Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, October 1, 2007; 86(4): 1251 - 1252. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. de Jonge, L. M Redman, T. Nguyen, E. Ravussin, J. P Delany, and E. C Hadley Reply to L Bowman and AB Loucks Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, October 1, 2007; 86(4): 1252 - 1253. [Full Text] [PDF]