| Abstract: | Objective: To evaluate and compare methods for achieving 24‐hour energy balance in a whole‐room indirect calorimeter. Research Methods and Procedures: Twenty‐four‐hour energy expenditure (EE) for 34 healthy adults (16 women, 18 men) was measured in a calorimeter during a prestudy day and on a subsequent nonconsecutive assessment day (AD). Several methods for estimating EE on the AD using activity factors or regression equations with data available before the AD anthropometrics, body composition, resting metabolic rate (RMR), sleeping metabolic rate (SMR) on prestudy day, 24‐hour EE on prestudy day] were compared for predictive accuracy. Results: Use of a 24‐hour calorimeter stay gave the smallest mean absolute error (119 ± 16 kcal/d) and smallest single maximum error (361 kcal/d). However, several other methods were only slightly, and not significantly, less accurate (e.g., mean absolute error = 131 ± 17, 140 ± 20, and 141 ± 22 kcal/d and greatest error = 384, 370, and 593 kcal/d for anthropometric, RMR, and SMR regression equations, respectively). Fat‐free mass alone and SMR with a simple activity factor were seen to be less accurate. Discussion: Our results indicate that there may be some improvement in achieving 24‐hour energy balance in a metabolic chamber by using a preceding 24‐hour calorimeter stay; that only slightly less accurate predictions can be obtained using a combination of anthropometric, body composition, and/or RMR measurements; and that there is little or no advantage in using SMR from a previous overnight calorimeter stay. |
