Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Revised Harris–Benedict Equation: New Human Resting Metabolic Rate Equation

      , , ,
      Metabolites
      MDPI AG

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This paper contains a revision of the Harris–Benedict equations through the development and validation of new equations for the estimation of resting metabolic rate (RMR) in normal, overweight, and obese adult subjects, taking into account the same anthropometric parameters. A total of 722 adult Caucasian subjects were enrolled in this analysis. After taking a detailed medical history, the study enrolled non-hospitalized subjects with medically and nutritionally controlled diseases such as diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and thyroid disease, excluding subjects with active infections and pregnant or lactating women. Measurement of somatometric characteristics and indirect calorimetry were performed. The values obtained from RMR measurement were compared with the values of the new equations and the Harris–Benedict, Mifflin–St Jeor, FAO/WHO/UNU, and Owen equations. New predictive RMR equations were developed using age, body weight, height, and sex parameters. RMR males: (9.65 × weight in kg) + (573 × height in m) − (5.08 × age in years) + 260; RMR females: (7.38 × weight in kg) + (607 × height in m) − (2.31 × age in years) + 43; RMR males: (4.38 × weight in pounds) + (14.55 × height in inches) − (5.08 × age in years) + 260; RMR females: (3.35 × weight in pounds) + (15.42 × height in inches) − (2.31 × age in years) + 43. The accuracy of the new equations was tested in the test group in both groups, in accordance with the resting metabolic rate measurements. The new equations showed more accurate results than the other equations, with the equation for men (R-squared: 0.95) showing better prediction than the equation for women (R-squared: 0.86). The new equations showed good accuracy at both group and individual levels, and better reliability compared to other equations using the same anthropometric variables as predictors of RMR. The new equations were created under modern obesogenic conditions, and do not exclude individuals with regulated (dietary or pharmacological) Westernized diseases (e.g., cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and thyroid disease).

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Epidemiology of Type 2 Diabetes – Global Burden of Disease and Forecasted Trends

          The rising burden of type 2 diabetes is a major concern in healthcare worldwide. This research aimed to analyze the global epidemiology of type 2 diabetes. We analyzed the incidence, prevalence, and burden of suffering of diabetes mellitus based on epidemiological data from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) current dataset from the Institute of Health Metrics, Seattle. Global and regional trends from 1990 to 2017 of type 2 diabetes for all ages were compiled. Forecast estimates were obtained using the SPSS Time Series Modeler. In 2017, approximately 462 million individuals were affected by type 2 diabetes corresponding to 6.28% of the world’s population (4.4% of those aged 15–49 years, 15% of those aged 50–69, and 22% of those aged 70+), or a prevalence rate of 6059 cases per 100,000. Over 1 million deaths per year can be attributed to diabetes alone, making it the ninth leading cause of mortality. The burden of diabetes mellitus is rising globally, and at a much faster rate in developed regions, such as Western Europe. The gender distribution is equal, and the incidence peaks at around 55 years of age. Global prevalence of type 2 diabetes is projected to increase to 7079 individuals per 100,000 by 2030, reflecting a continued rise across all regions of the world. There are concerning trends of rising prevalence in lower-income countries. Urgent public health and clinical preventive measures are warranted.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals.

            A predictive equation for resting energy expenditure (REE) was derived from data from 498 healthy subjects, including females (n = 247) and males (n = 251), aged 19-78 y (45 +/- 14 y, mean +/- SD). Normal-weight (n = 264) and obese (n = 234) individuals were studied and REE was measured by indirect calorimetry. Multiple-regression analyses were employed to drive relationships between REE and weight, height, and age for both men and women (R2 = 0.71): REE = 9.99 x weight + 6.25 x height - 4.92 x age + 166 x sex (males, 1; females, 0) - 161. Simplification of this formula and separation by sex did not affect its predictive value: REE (males) = 10 x weight (kg) + 6.25 x height (cm) - 5 x age (y) + 5; REE (females) = 10 x weight (kg) + 6.25 x height (cm) - 5 x age (y) - 161. The inclusion of relative body weight and body-weight distribution did not significantly improve the predictive value of these equations. The Harris-Benedict Equations derived in 1919 overestimated measured REE by 5% (p less than 0.01). Fat-free mass (FFM) was the best single predictor of REE (R2 = 0.64): REE = 19.7 x FFM + 413. Weight also was closely correlated with REE (R2 = 0.56): REE = 15.1 x weight + 371.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comparison of predictive equations for resting metabolic rate in healthy nonobese and obese adults: a systematic review.

              An assessment of energy needs is a necessary component in the development and evaluation of a nutrition care plan. The metabolic rate can be measured or estimated by equations, but estimation is by far the more common method. However, predictive equations might generate errors large enough to impact outcome. Therefore, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken to document the accuracy of predictive equations preliminary to deciding on the imperative to measure metabolic rate. As part of a larger project to determine the role of indirect calorimetry in clinical practice, an evidence team identified published articles that examined the validity of various predictive equations for resting metabolic rate (RMR) in nonobese and obese people and also in individuals of various ethnic and age groups. Articles were accepted based on defined criteria and abstracted using evidence analysis tools developed by the American Dietetic Association. Because these equations are applied by dietetics practitioners to individuals, a key inclusion criterion was research reports of individual data. The evidence was systematically evaluated, and a conclusion statement and grade were developed. Four prediction equations were identified as the most commonly used in clinical practice (Harris-Benedict, Mifflin-St Jeor, Owen, and World Health Organization/Food and Agriculture Organization/United Nations University [WHO/FAO/UNU]). Of these equations, the Mifflin-St Jeor equation was the most reliable, predicting RMR within 10% of measured in more nonobese and obese individuals than any other equation, and it also had the narrowest error range. No validation work concentrating on individual errors was found for the WHO/FAO/UNU equation. Older adults and US-residing ethnic minorities were underrepresented both in the development of predictive equations and in validation studies. The Mifflin-St Jeor equation is more likely than the other equations tested to estimate RMR to within 10% of that measured, but noteworthy errors and limitations exist when it is applied to individuals and possibly when it is generalized to certain age and ethnic groups. RMR estimation errors would be eliminated by valid measurement of RMR with indirect calorimetry, using an evidence-based protocol to minimize measurement error. The Expert Panel advises clinical judgment regarding when to accept estimated RMR using predictive equations in any given individual. Indirect calorimetry may be an important tool when, in the judgment of the clinician, the predictive methods fail an individual in a clinically relevant way. For members of groups that are greatly underrepresented by existing validation studies of predictive equations, a high level of suspicion regarding the accuracy of the equations is warranted.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                METALU
                Metabolites
                Metabolites
                MDPI AG
                2218-1989
                February 2023
                January 28 2023
                : 13
                : 2
                : 189
                Article
                10.3390/metabo13020189
                c943925d-f540-452f-a7ed-458e15935460
                © 2023

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article