TY - JOUR
T1 - Congruent validity and reliability of two metabolic systems to measure resting metabolic rate
AU - Welch, Whitney Allegra
AU - Strath, S. J.
AU - Swartz, A. M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
PY - 2015/5/1
Y1 - 2015/5/1
N2 - Determine the congruent validity and intra- and inter-day reliability of RMR measures assessed by the ParvoMedics Trueone 2-400 hood dilution method (Parvo) and Cosmed K4b2 (Cosmed) breath-by-breath metabolic systems. Participants underwent 6 RMR assessments over 2 consecutive mornings, 3 with the Parvo (Day 1: Parvo 1; Day 2: Parvo 2, 3), 3 with the Cosmed (Day 1: Cosmed 1; Day 2: Cosmed 2, 3). Measured VE, FEO2, FECO2, VO2, VCO2, kcal/day, and HR values were averaged over a minimum of 10-min. Intra- and inter-day reliability within each system was determined with RMANOVA, and congruent validity was assessed via paired sample t-tests. 31 participants (13 females, 18 males; 27.3±7-years, 24.8±3.1-kg.m2) completed the study. There were no significant differences in any within or between day Parvo values or Cosmed values. When systems were compared, there was a significant difference between VE (Parvo2: 25.03-L/min, Cosmed2: 8.98-L/min) and FEO2 (Parvo2: 19.68%, Cosmed2: 16.63%), however, there were no significant difference in device-calculated RMR (kcals/day). The Parvo and Cosmed are reliable metabolic system with no intra- or inter-day differences in RMR. Due to differences in measurement technology, FEO2, VE were significantly different between systems, but the resultant RMR values were not significantly different.
AB - Determine the congruent validity and intra- and inter-day reliability of RMR measures assessed by the ParvoMedics Trueone 2-400 hood dilution method (Parvo) and Cosmed K4b2 (Cosmed) breath-by-breath metabolic systems. Participants underwent 6 RMR assessments over 2 consecutive mornings, 3 with the Parvo (Day 1: Parvo 1; Day 2: Parvo 2, 3), 3 with the Cosmed (Day 1: Cosmed 1; Day 2: Cosmed 2, 3). Measured VE, FEO2, FECO2, VO2, VCO2, kcal/day, and HR values were averaged over a minimum of 10-min. Intra- and inter-day reliability within each system was determined with RMANOVA, and congruent validity was assessed via paired sample t-tests. 31 participants (13 females, 18 males; 27.3±7-years, 24.8±3.1-kg.m2) completed the study. There were no significant differences in any within or between day Parvo values or Cosmed values. When systems were compared, there was a significant difference between VE (Parvo2: 25.03-L/min, Cosmed2: 8.98-L/min) and FEO2 (Parvo2: 19.68%, Cosmed2: 16.63%), however, there were no significant difference in device-calculated RMR (kcals/day). The Parvo and Cosmed are reliable metabolic system with no intra- or inter-day differences in RMR. Due to differences in measurement technology, FEO2, VE were significantly different between systems, but the resultant RMR values were not significantly different.
KW - energy expenditure
KW - indirect calorimetry
KW - measurement
KW - oxygen consumption
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84928882458&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84928882458&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1055/s-0034-1398575
DO - 10.1055/s-0034-1398575
M3 - Article
C2 - 25700097
AN - SCOPUS:84928882458
SN - 0172-4622
VL - 36
SP - 414
EP - 418
JO - International Journal of Sports Medicine
JF - International Journal of Sports Medicine
IS - 5
ER -