TY - JOUR
T1 - Impact of obesity on underreporting of energy intake in type 2 diabetic patients
T2 - Clinical Evaluation of Energy Requirements in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (CLEVER-DM) study
AU - CLEVER-DM Study Research Group
AU - Miyazawa, Itsuko
AU - Morino, Katsutaro
AU - Fuse, Keiko
AU - Kondo, Keiko
AU - Ohi, Akiko
AU - Nishida, Kaori
AU - Kurihara, Mika
AU - Yasuhara, Shoko
AU - Nakanishi, Naoko
AU - Nishida, Yuki
AU - Nakae, Satoshi
AU - Yamada, Yosuke
AU - Tanaka, Shigeho
AU - Ebine, Naoyuki
AU - Sasaki, Satoshi
AU - Katsukawa, Fuminori
AU - Sasaki, Masaya
AU - Ugi, Satoshi
AU - Maegawa, Hiroshi
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was funded by Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development under Grant Numbers JP17ek0210045 and JP20ek0210112 . This study was also supported in part by the Japan Foundation for Applied Enzymology (to K. Kondo).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism
PY - 2020/10
Y1 - 2020/10
N2 - Background & aims: Although accurate assessment of energy intake (EI) is critical in diabetes care, underreporting of EI on dietary records (DR) is often an issue. However, few studies have examined EI with doubly labeled water (DLW) in patients with diabetes mellitus. We aimed to investigate the impact of sex and obesity on the dissociation of DR from total energy expenditure (TEE) evaluated with DLW in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: Fifty-two patients with type 2 diabetes aged 60–79 years were enrolled for the Clinical Evaluation of Energy Requirements in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (CLEVER-DM) study at a single university hospital. TEE was measured over 14 days by the DLW method as standard. EI was calculated by assessment of 3-day DR by registered dietitians. Results: The mean difference between EI and TEE was 238 ± 412 kcal/day (~10% of TEE). Neither EI nor TEE was significantly different between obese (body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2) and non-obese (BMI <25 kg/m2) patients. There was a negative correlation between EI/TEE ratio and BMI in women (R = −0.437, P = 0.033) but not in men (R = −0.174, P = 0.377). There was a significant difference in EI/TEE ratio between obese and non-obese patients among women (0.85 ± 0.15 vs. 1.01 ± 0.21, P = 0.045) but not men (0.85 ± 0.20 vs. 0.87 ± 0.17, P = 0.79). Conclusions: EI calculated by 3-day DR may underestimate habitual intake, which is assumed to be equal to TEE measured by the DLW method except in non-obese women with diabetes. Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000023051.
AB - Background & aims: Although accurate assessment of energy intake (EI) is critical in diabetes care, underreporting of EI on dietary records (DR) is often an issue. However, few studies have examined EI with doubly labeled water (DLW) in patients with diabetes mellitus. We aimed to investigate the impact of sex and obesity on the dissociation of DR from total energy expenditure (TEE) evaluated with DLW in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: Fifty-two patients with type 2 diabetes aged 60–79 years were enrolled for the Clinical Evaluation of Energy Requirements in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (CLEVER-DM) study at a single university hospital. TEE was measured over 14 days by the DLW method as standard. EI was calculated by assessment of 3-day DR by registered dietitians. Results: The mean difference between EI and TEE was 238 ± 412 kcal/day (~10% of TEE). Neither EI nor TEE was significantly different between obese (body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2) and non-obese (BMI <25 kg/m2) patients. There was a negative correlation between EI/TEE ratio and BMI in women (R = −0.437, P = 0.033) but not in men (R = −0.174, P = 0.377). There was a significant difference in EI/TEE ratio between obese and non-obese patients among women (0.85 ± 0.15 vs. 1.01 ± 0.21, P = 0.045) but not men (0.85 ± 0.20 vs. 0.87 ± 0.17, P = 0.79). Conclusions: EI calculated by 3-day DR may underestimate habitual intake, which is assumed to be equal to TEE measured by the DLW method except in non-obese women with diabetes. Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000023051.
KW - Doubly labeled water method
KW - Energy expenditure
KW - Obesity
KW - Type 2 diabetes
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85088369796&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85088369796&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.07.001
DO - 10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.07.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 32859325
AN - SCOPUS:85088369796
SN - 2405-4577
VL - 39
SP - 251
EP - 254
JO - Clinical Nutrition ESPEN
JF - Clinical Nutrition ESPEN
ER -