2003
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/77.2.371
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differences in resting metabolic rate between paraplegic and able-bodied subjects are explained by differences in body composition

Abstract: FFM, BCM, and RMR, but not obligatory TEF, are lower in paraplegics than in control subjects. RMR does not differ between control and paraplegic subjects after adjustment for FFM, indicating similar metabolic activity in the fat-free compartment of the body.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
122
2
4

Year Published

2005
2005
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 166 publications
(142 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
8
122
2
4
Order By: Relevance
“…20,21 The reason for these shifts in body composition have been well documented. 19,21,22 Following SCI, LBM begins to atrophy below the level of injury and is replaced by BF. 23 This disproportionate amount of fat in individuals with SCI has serious implications for long-term morbidity and mortality.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…20,21 The reason for these shifts in body composition have been well documented. 19,21,22 Following SCI, LBM begins to atrophy below the level of injury and is replaced by BF. 23 This disproportionate amount of fat in individuals with SCI has serious implications for long-term morbidity and mortality.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2 Mean percent fat mass (measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), isotope dilution or the threecompartment model) reported in cross-sectional studies of persons (mostly men) with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI) ranges from 23 to 35%. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] The percentage of body weight as fat mass is 8-18% higher in SCI versus age-, height-and/or weight-matched able-bodied control subjects. These values are often consistent with the above definitions of obesity, and are summarized in Table 1.…”
Section: Body Mass Index (Bmi) As a Marker Of Obesity In Chronic Scimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…12 Mean BMI values in studies of persons with long-standing SCI range from 20 to 27, 5,6,10,[13][14][15][16][17][18] consistent with the classifications of normal and overweight, but inconsistent with classification based on measured percent fat mass. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] One reason for the underestimation of obesity using BMI may be the potential measurement error associated with determination of weight and/or height in persons with SCI. While weight can be measured using a wheelchair scale, an accurate height is difficult to obtain in those who are wheelchair dependent.…”
Section: Body Mass Index (Bmi) As a Marker Of Obesity In Chronic Scimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Height and weight were measured, and BMI was calculated using body weight/height squared (kg/m 2 ). Waist circumference (WC) was measured at the level of the lowest rib and classified based on standard classification (male: >102 cm, female: >88 cm) [15]. Blood pressure (BP) was measured on the right arm in the sitting position after a 5 min rest by auscultation using a stethoscope twice (6 h interval), and the mean of these was used.…”
Section: Anthropometric Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%