The aim of the current study was to determine if a single ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400 metabolic cart provides valid and reliable measurement of RMR in comparison with the criterion Douglas Bag method (DB). Ten endurance-trained participants completed duplicate RMR measurements on 2 consecutive days using the ParvoMedics system in exercise mode, with the same expirate analyzed using DB. Typical error (TE) in mean RMR between the systems was 578.9 kJ or 7.5% (p = .01). In comparison with DB, the ParvoMedics system over-estimated RMR by 946.7 ± 818.6 kJ. The bias between systems resulted from ParvoMedics VE(STPD) values. A regression equation was developed to correct the bias, which reduced the difference to -83.3 ± 631.9 kJ. TE for the corrected ParvoMedics data were 446.8 kJ or 7.2% (p = .70). On Day 1, intraday reliability in mean RMR for DB was 286.8 kJ or 4.3%, (p = .54) and for ParvoMedicsuncorrected, 359.3 kJ or 4.4%, (p = .35), with closer agreement observed on Day 2. Interday reliability for DB was 455.3 kJ or 6.6% (p = .61) and for ParvoMedicsuncorrected, 390.2 kJ or 6.3% (p = .54). Similar intraday and interday TE was observed between ParvoMedicsuncorrected and ParvoMedicscorrected data. The ParvoMedics TrueOne 2400 provided valid and reliable RMR values compared with DB when the VE(STPD) error was corrected. This will enable widespread monitoring of RMR using the ParvoMedics system in a range of field-based settings when DB is not available.
Woods and Garvican-Lewis are with the University of Canberra Research Institute for Sport and Exercise and Dept. of Physiology, Australian Institute of Sport, Australian Institute of Sport, Canberra, Australia. Rice is with the Dept. of Physiology, Australian Institute of Sport, Canberra, Australia. Thompson is with the Faculty of Health, University of Canberra Research Institute for Sport and Exercise, Canberra, Australia.