Validity of a new portable indirect calorimeter: the AeroSport TEEM 100

  • S. Novitsky
  • K. R. Segal
  • B. Chatr-Aryamontri
  • D. Guvakov
  • V. L. Katch
Technical Note

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare oxygen uptake (\(\dot V{\text{O}}_{\text{2}} \)) values collected with a new portable indirect calorimeter (AeroSport TEEM 100 Metabolic Analysis System) against a more traditional large calorimeter system that has been reported to be valid and reliable (SensorMedics 2900 Metabolic Measurement Cart). Minute ventilations ranging from rest up to heavy exercise were compared with simultaneous measurements from a 120-1 Tissot gasometer. Each of the three TEEM 100 pneumotachs were tested. Three hundred and sixty-one separate ventilation tests were performed using the low-flow, medium-flow, and high-flow heads of the portable calorimeter. For each of the pneumotachs, the correlation between the portable calorimeter values and the gasometer values exceededr = 0.94. The standard error of estimate for the low-, medium- and high-flow pneumotach were 5.96, 4.89 and 9.0%, respectively, expressed relative to the mean gasometer value. Simultaneous measurements of\(\dot V{\text{O}}_{\text{2}} \) using the portable calorimeter and the SensorMedics 2900 unit were compared during rest and at work rates starting at zero watts, increasing by 25 W to 150 W. Each work rate was of 4 min duration. The average of data from minutes 3 and 4 were used in all analyses. There was very close agreement between the two metabolic measurement systems. Except at the 100-W work rate, where the\(\dot V{\text{O}}_{\text{2}} \) difference was small (3.9%), yet statistically significant, all of the other differences in\(\dot V{\text{O}}_{\text{2}} \) were small and non-significant. The scatter plot of\(\dot V{\text{O}}_{\text{2}} \) for the SensorMedics versus the portable Aero-Sport calorimeter revealed close agreement; the correlation wasr = 0.96, (SEE = 3.95%). It was concluded that the AeroSport TEEM 100 portable calorimeter system produces valid data at rest and at low to moderate work rates compared to a criterion, large system.

Key words

Oxygen uptake Indirect calorimetry Portable analysis Exercise Metabolism 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AeroSport (1993) TEEM 100 Total Energy Expenditure Measurement operators manual. Ann Arbor, Mich, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. Atwater WO, Rosa EB (1899) Description of a new respiration calorimeter and experiments on the conservation of energy in the human body. U.S. Department of Agriculture Off. Exp. Sta. Bull 63Google Scholar
  3. Consolazio CF, Johnson RE, Pecora LJ (1963) Physiological measurements of metabolic functions in man. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Haldane JS (1892) A new form of apparatus for measuring the respiratory exchange of animals. J Physiol (London) 13:419–430Google Scholar
  5. Kane J, Jones N, Nones TE, Sutton B (1983) An evaluation of the Beckman Metabolic Measurement Cart. Beckman reprint no. 0323Google Scholar
  6. Kannagi T (1983) An evaluation of the Beckman Metabolic Cart for measuring ventilation and aerobic requirements during exercise. J Cardiac Rehabil 3:38Google Scholar
  7. Kleiber M (1975) The fire of life: an introduction to animal energetics, 2nd ed. Krieger, Huntington, N. Y.Google Scholar
  8. Lavoisier AL, de La Place RS (1789) Memoire sur la chaleur; memoires de l'Academie Royale. Reprinted in Ostwald's Klassiker, no. 40, Leipzig, 1892Google Scholar
  9. Lothian F, Farrally MR, Mahoney C (1993) Validity and reliability of the Cosmed K2 to measure oxygen uptake. Can J Appl Physiol 18:197–206Google Scholar
  10. McArdle WD, Katch FI, Katch VL (1991) Exercise physiology: energy, nutrition, and human performance, 3rd edn. Lea and Febiger, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  11. McNeill G, Cox MD, Rivers JPW (1987) The Oxylog oxygen consumption meter: a portable device for measurement of energy expenditure. Am J Clin Nutr 45:1415–9Google Scholar
  12. Norton AC (1980) Portable equipment for gas exchange. In: Assessment of energy metabolism in health and disease. Ross Laboratories, Columbus, OhioGoogle Scholar
  13. Peel C, Utsey C (1993) Oxygen consumption using the K2 telemetry system and a metabolic cart. Med Sci Sports Exerc 25:396–400Google Scholar
  14. Scholander PF (1947) Analyzer for accurate estimation of respiratory gases in one-half cubic centimeter samples. J Biol Chem 167:235–250Google Scholar
  15. SensorMedics (1991) 2900 Metabolic Cart operator's manual, part no. 767257. Los Angeles, Calif.Google Scholar
  16. Webb P, Troutman SJ (1970) An instrument for continuous measurement of oxygen consumption. J Appl Physiol 28:876Google Scholar
  17. Wilmore JH, Costill DL (1974) Semiautomated systems approach to the assessment of oxygen uptake during exercise. J Appl Physiol 36:618Google Scholar
  18. Wilmore JH, Davis JA, Norton AC (1976) An automated system for assessing metabolic and respiratory function during exercise. J Appl Physiol 40:619Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Novitsky
    • 1
  • K. R. Segal
    • 2
  • B. Chatr-Aryamontri
    • 2
  • D. Guvakov
    • 2
  • V. L. Katch
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Applied Physiology Department of Movement Science, Division of Kinesiology and Section of Pediatric Cardiology, School of MedicineThe University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Division of Pediatric CardiologyThe New York Hospital-Cornell Medical CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations