Cited by 143Clinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyBody Composition Measurement TechniquesHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy

Predictive equations versus measured energy expenditure by indirect calorimetry: A retrospective validation

Zusman, Oren, Kagan, Ilya, Bendavid, Itai, Theilla, Miriam, Cohen, Jonathan, Singer, Pierre·2019·Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background & aims Measuring resting energy expenditure (REE) via indirect calorimetry (IC) in intensive care unit (ICU) patient is the gold standard recommended by guidelines. However technical difficulties hinder its use and predictive equations are largely used instead. We sought to validate commonly used equations using a large cohort of patients.Methods Patients hospitalized from 2003 to 2015 in a 16-bed ICU at a university-affiliated, tertiary care hospital who had IC measurement to assess caloric targets were included. Data was drawn from a computerized system and included REE and other variables required by equations. Measurements were restricted to 5 REE per patient to avoid bias. Equation performance was assessed by comparing means, standard deviations, correlation, concordance and agreement, which was defined as a measurement within 85-115% of measured REE. A total of 8 equations were examined.Results A total of 3573 REE measurements in 1440 patients were included. Mean patient age was 58 years and 65% were male. A total of 562 (39%) patients had >2 REE measurements. Standard deviation of REE ranged from 430 to 570 kcal. The Faisy equation had the least mean difference (90 Kcal); Harris-Benedict had the highest correlation (52%) and agreement (50%) and Jolliet the highest concordance (62%). Agreement within 10% of caloric needs was met only in a third of patients.Conclusions Predictive equations have low performance when compared to REE in ICU patients. We therefore suggest that predictive equations cannot wholly replace indirect calorimetry for the accurate estimation of REE in this population.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.04.020

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A formula-based nutritional approach has no more value than flipping a coin and inevitably leads to under- or overestimation of calorie needs.

    “However, a formula-based nutritional approach has no more value than flipping a coin and inevitably leads to under- or overestimation of calorie needs [10,11].”

    From Nutrition in Sepsis: A Bench-to-Bedside Review. (2020) · cites this paper as [11]

  • A too low intake, below 50%, may lead to severe calorie debt, empty energy reserves, reduce lean body mass and may increase infectious complications.

    “On the other hand, a too low intake, below 50%, may lead to severe calorie debt and empty the energy reserves, reduce lean body mass and may increase infectious complications (118, 119).”
  • Negative energy balance has been shown to be associated with poor outcome and is one of the main physiological concepts guiding nutrition prescription.

    “It has to be stressed that negative energy balance has been shown to be associated with poor outcome (117, 118) and is one of the main physiological concepts guiding nutrition prescription.”
  • The predictive equations are associated with significant inaccuracy (up to 60%), leading to over or under evaluation of the needs and inducing over or underfeeding.

    “The predictive equations are associated with significant inaccuracy (up to 60%), leading to over or under evaluation of the needs and inducing over or underfeeding [42].”
  • Even after adjustment by patient populations and modification factors, estimated energy deviations still exist and can be as high as 60%.

    “Though adjusted by patient populations and modification factors, the estimated energy deviations still exist, and even high up to 60% [26].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zusman, O., Kagan, I., Bendavid, I., Theilla, M., Cohen, J., & Singer, P.
Affiliations
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Corresponding author
Zusman, Oren
Venue
Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-06
Volume
38
Issue
3
Pages
1206-1210
ISSN
0261-5614 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2802839310
Cited by
143
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 2
FWCI
10.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Keywords
resting energy expenditure, prediction equations, indirect calorimetry, equation validation, intensive care unit patients, Harris-Benedict equation, caloric requirements
MeSH terms
Adult, Energy Intake, Calorimetry, Indirect, Energy Metabolism, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Reproducibility of Results, Models, Statistical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review