A Validation of Equations for Predicting the Energy Expenditures of Hospitalized Patients

JO O. Wall, CS S. Ireton-Jones, GU U. Liepa, WW W. Turner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Indirect calorimetry most accurately determines energy expenditures (EE) for the purpose of establishing nutrient requirements in hospitalized patients. However, the high costs associated with clinically using indirect calorimetry have renewed interest in predictive energy expenditure equations. We compared measured energy expenditures (MEEs) to those calculated by two commonly used equations: the Harris Benedict (HB) with a disease related adjustment factor of 1.2 (HB1.2) and the Ireton-Jones (IJ) in 120 patients (53 female/67 male). Patients were categorized according to the following diagnoses: burn (18%), non-burn trauma (30%), and non-trauma/non-burn (52%). Forty-one percent of the patients were ventilator dependent (VD). Overall there was no significant difference between the HB1.2 and the MEE. The HB1.2 correlated significantly with the MEE (r = 0.643, p= < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the LI and the MEE and the two correlated significantly (r = 0.735, p= < 0.001). When evaluating EE by subgroups, the HB1.2 significantly underestimated the MEE of both burn and VD patients (p = 0.01), while the IJ was not significantly different from the MEE. The correlation of the IJ with the MEE was higher than that found with the HB1.2. The IJ accurately predicts the EE of hospitalized patients with various diagnoses.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of the American Dietetic Association
Volume95
Issue number9 SUPPL.
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1995

Fingerprint

energy expenditure
Energy Metabolism
ventilators
Indirect Calorimetry
calorimetry
Mechanical Ventilators
nutrient requirements
Costs and Cost Analysis
Food
Wounds and Injuries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nutrition and Dietetics
  • Food Science

Cite this

A Validation of Equations for Predicting the Energy Expenditures of Hospitalized Patients. / Wall, JO O.; Ireton-Jones, CS S.; Liepa, GU U.; Turner, WW W.

In: Journal of the American Dietetic Association, Vol. 95, No. 9 SUPPL., 09.1995.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8ec5c4ae9cd747aa805cc381e56de74d,
title = "A Validation of Equations for Predicting the Energy Expenditures of Hospitalized Patients",
abstract = "Indirect calorimetry most accurately determines energy expenditures (EE) for the purpose of establishing nutrient requirements in hospitalized patients. However, the high costs associated with clinically using indirect calorimetry have renewed interest in predictive energy expenditure equations. We compared measured energy expenditures (MEEs) to those calculated by two commonly used equations: the Harris Benedict (HB) with a disease related adjustment factor of 1.2 (HB1.2) and the Ireton-Jones (IJ) in 120 patients (53 female/67 male). Patients were categorized according to the following diagnoses: burn (18{\%}), non-burn trauma (30{\%}), and non-trauma/non-burn (52{\%}). Forty-one percent of the patients were ventilator dependent (VD). Overall there was no significant difference between the HB1.2 and the MEE. The HB1.2 correlated significantly with the MEE (r = 0.643, p= < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the LI and the MEE and the two correlated significantly (r = 0.735, p= < 0.001). When evaluating EE by subgroups, the HB1.2 significantly underestimated the MEE of both burn and VD patients (p = 0.01), while the IJ was not significantly different from the MEE. The correlation of the IJ with the MEE was higher than that found with the HB1.2. The IJ accurately predicts the EE of hospitalized patients with various diagnoses.",
author = "Wall, {JO O.} and Ireton-Jones, {CS S.} and Liepa, {GU U.} and Turner, {WW W.}",
year = "1995",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/S0002-8223(95)00432-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "95",
journal = "Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics",
issn = "2212-2672",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "9 SUPPL.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Validation of Equations for Predicting the Energy Expenditures of Hospitalized Patients

AU - Wall, JO O.

AU - Ireton-Jones, CS S.

AU - Liepa, GU U.

AU - Turner, WW W.

PY - 1995/9

Y1 - 1995/9

N2 - Indirect calorimetry most accurately determines energy expenditures (EE) for the purpose of establishing nutrient requirements in hospitalized patients. However, the high costs associated with clinically using indirect calorimetry have renewed interest in predictive energy expenditure equations. We compared measured energy expenditures (MEEs) to those calculated by two commonly used equations: the Harris Benedict (HB) with a disease related adjustment factor of 1.2 (HB1.2) and the Ireton-Jones (IJ) in 120 patients (53 female/67 male). Patients were categorized according to the following diagnoses: burn (18%), non-burn trauma (30%), and non-trauma/non-burn (52%). Forty-one percent of the patients were ventilator dependent (VD). Overall there was no significant difference between the HB1.2 and the MEE. The HB1.2 correlated significantly with the MEE (r = 0.643, p= < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the LI and the MEE and the two correlated significantly (r = 0.735, p= < 0.001). When evaluating EE by subgroups, the HB1.2 significantly underestimated the MEE of both burn and VD patients (p = 0.01), while the IJ was not significantly different from the MEE. The correlation of the IJ with the MEE was higher than that found with the HB1.2. The IJ accurately predicts the EE of hospitalized patients with various diagnoses.

AB - Indirect calorimetry most accurately determines energy expenditures (EE) for the purpose of establishing nutrient requirements in hospitalized patients. However, the high costs associated with clinically using indirect calorimetry have renewed interest in predictive energy expenditure equations. We compared measured energy expenditures (MEEs) to those calculated by two commonly used equations: the Harris Benedict (HB) with a disease related adjustment factor of 1.2 (HB1.2) and the Ireton-Jones (IJ) in 120 patients (53 female/67 male). Patients were categorized according to the following diagnoses: burn (18%), non-burn trauma (30%), and non-trauma/non-burn (52%). Forty-one percent of the patients were ventilator dependent (VD). Overall there was no significant difference between the HB1.2 and the MEE. The HB1.2 correlated significantly with the MEE (r = 0.643, p= < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the LI and the MEE and the two correlated significantly (r = 0.735, p= < 0.001). When evaluating EE by subgroups, the HB1.2 significantly underestimated the MEE of both burn and VD patients (p = 0.01), while the IJ was not significantly different from the MEE. The correlation of the IJ with the MEE was higher than that found with the HB1.2. The IJ accurately predicts the EE of hospitalized patients with various diagnoses.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0013495332&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0013495332&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0002-8223(95)00432-7

DO - 10.1016/S0002-8223(95)00432-7

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0013495332

VL - 95

JO - Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics

JF - Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics

SN - 2212-2672

IS - 9 SUPPL.

ER -