+44-330-822-4832
Spanish 
Chinese 
Russian 
German 
French 
Japanese 
Portuguese 
Hindi Review Article
Special Considerations for Measuring Energy Expenditure with Doubly Labeled Water under Atypical Conditions
| Surabhi Bhutani*, Natalie Racine, Tim Shriver and Dale A Schoeller | |
| Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin, 53706, USA | |
| Corresponding Author : | Surabhi Bhutani PhD, Department of Nutritional Sciences University of Wisconsin Madison 1415 Linden Drive, Room 407 Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA Tel: 6082611902 Fax: 6082625860 E-mail: bhutani@nutrisci.wisc.edu |
| Received: June 29, 2015 Accepted: July 21, 2015 Published: July 30, 2015 | |
| Citation: Bhutani S, Racine N, Shriver T, Schoeller DA (2015) Special Considerations for Measuring Energy Expenditure with Doubly Labeled Water under Atypical Conditions. J Obes Weight Loss Ther S5:002. doi:10.4172/2165-7904.S5-002 | |
| Copyright: © 2015 F Bhutani S, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. | |
| Related article at Pubmed, Scholar Google | |
Abstract
The global increase in the prevalence of obesity has dramatically increased interest in understanding the factors that influence human total energy expenditure (TEE). This in turn has increased interest in the doubly labeled water (DLW) method, a technique for measurement of total energy expenditure in free-living humans. The increasing use of this method is attributed to its portability, objectivity, minimal invasiveness, high accuracy and good precision. Although a relatively standard protocol for the method has emerged, the new generation of users often is unfamiliar with rationale behind aspects of the protocol as well as the approaches to avoid or correct for in situations that are not covered by the standard protocol procedure. The primary uncommon situations like introduction of isotopically different diet and fluids with or without geographical relocation, seasonal and temperature variations, activity level of participants etc. during or prior to the DLW measurements can lead to shift in baseline abundance of 2H and 18O or tracer elimination, resulting in moderate to large errors in the measured TEE. These unique situations call for special modifications to the conventional protocol to minimize errors. The objective of the present review was to assemble a list of frequently asked questions and the issues they represent, and then examine the available literature to describe and explain the modifications to the standard DLW protocol to maintain the method’s accuracy. This discussion of DLW protocol modification can be an excellent resource for investigators who intend to use this measurement technique for interesting and uncommon study designs.
