Use of the activPAL® triaxial accelerometer to estimate total energy expenditure in low-income women: differences between body mass index classifications

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess the agreement between the total energy expenditure (TEE) estimated by the activPAL ® triaxial accelerometers (ACC) and the TEE measured by the doubly labeled water method (DLW), as well as to assess if these values differ between the classifications of body mass index (BMI). Materials and methods: This is a cross-sectional study. Low-income adult women (19-45y) with BMI ≥ 18.5 kg/m 2 were included. Accelerometry data (activPAL ® ) were collected over 7 consecutive days, which were used to calculate TEE-ACC and compared with DLW data. The Bland-Altman method, concordance correlation coefficient and root mean square error were used to assess agreement between methods. Results: The sample consisted of 55 women with a mean age of 31 ± 5 years. The agreement between TEE-ACC and TEE-DLW showed a bias of -142.5 kcal (-7.1%). Among the BMI classifications, participants with normal weight show a bias of -417.1 kcal (-21.0%), participants with overweight, -87.5 kcal (-3.9%) and participants with obesity, 97.5 kcal (4.3%). Furthermore, the bias between the methods showed a significant and positive correlation with the body weight (r = 0.49; p < 0.01). Conclusion: The TEE-ACC estimates from activPAL ® were reasonably accurate when compared to the TEE-DLW, especially in women with overweight and obesity, being much less accurate in individuals with normal weight.

Comparison of total daily energy expenditure with dietary reference intakes values in a sample of urban, relatively active Brazilian adults: A doubly labeled water study

“…These data disagree with previous studies that reported accurate TDEE estimates (mean bias of ≅−2%) using measured BMR to determine PAL but using the 2005 DRI equations in a sample of 38 Brazilian older adults (Batista et al, 2021) and in 20 Brazilian women before bariatric surgery using accelerometry to estimate PAL (mean bias of 5%; Ravelli et al, 2018). Macena et al (2023) also reported accurate DRI ER estimation (mean bias of ≅−1.5%) in a sample of 55 low‐income overweight Brazilian women (mean age = 31.0 ± 5.4 years), but PAL was determined by accelerometry and BMR was not measured. An important feature of the new DRI equations is that they were developed to correct the interindividual variability of TDEE but data from non‐high‐income countries were excluded in the DRI equation development because of the differences in health, behavior, and environment in these countries, factors that might influence the ER calculations (NASEM, 2023).…”