• Peter J M Weijs.
• Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Hogeschool van Amsterdam, University of Applied Science, Amsterdam, Netherlands. p.j.m.weijs@hva.nl
• Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2008 Oct 1; 88 (4): 959-70.

BackgroundIndividual energy requirements of overweight and obese adults can often not be measured by indirect calorimetry.ObjectiveThe objective was to analyze which resting energy expenditure (REE) predictive equation was the best alternative to indirect calorimetry in US and Dutch adults aged 18-65 y with a body mass index (in kg/m(2)) of 25 to 40.DesignPredictive equations based on weight, height, sex, age, fat-free mass, and fat mass were tested. REE in Dutch adults was measured with indirect calorimetry, and published data from the Institute of Medicine were used for US adults. The accuracy of the equations was evaluated on the basis of the percentage of subjects predicted within 10% of the REE measured, the root mean squared prediction error (RMSE), and the mean percentage difference (bias) between predicted and measured REE.ResultsTwenty-seven predictive equations (9 of which were based on FFM) were included. Validation was based on 180 women and 158 men from the United States and on 154 women and 54 men from the Netherlands aged <65 y with a body mass index (in kg/m(2)) of 25 to 40. Most accurate and precise for the US adults was the Mifflin equation (prediction accuracy: 79%; bias: -1.0%; RMSE: 136 kcal/d), for overweight Dutch adults was the FAO/WHO/UNU weight equation (prediction accuracy: 68%; bias: -2.5%; RMSE: 178), and for obese Dutch adults was the Lazzer equation (prediction accuracy: 69%; bias: -3.0%; RMSE: 215 kcal/d).ConclusionsFor US adults aged 18-65 y with a body mass index of 25 to 40, the REE can best be estimated with the Mifflin equation. For overweight and obese Dutch adults, there appears to be no accurate equation.

28 keywords...

hide…