Doubly labelled water: Multi-point and two-point methods in pre-school children.

OBJECTIVE We compared the multi-sample and two-sample methods for measuring total energy expenditure (TEE) using doubly labelled water (DLW) in pre-school children to establish whether taking multiple samples provides any advantage in free-living conditions. METHODS Sixty-five children (32 boys; aged 2-6 years) were recruited from Aberdeen, UK. TEE was measured over 7 and 14 days using the multi-point and two-point methods by DLW. Total body composition was measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS There was no significant difference between the mean TEE estimated using the multi-point and two-point methods. Independent of sampling technique, there was no significant difference in the TEE estimated over 7 and 14 days. Correlation of the deviations of the day-to-day enrichments suggests that the major factors driving isotope affected both isotopes. Association between fat-free mass (FFM) and TEE over 14 days was higher when using the multi-point method (r(2)=57.7%, P<0.001) compared with the two-point method (r(2)=41.1%, P < 0.001). There was no systematic bias in the difference between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS Multi- and two-point approaches give similar results for calculation of daily TEE in pre-school children. For studies aiming to establish a population level of TEE the two-sample method is a cost effective approach. However, the multi-point method appears to have greater accuracy and precision based on the better relationship to FFM (or FFM and FM combined). Consequently where maximum precision is required, in particular when energy expenditure of individual subjects is needed, this approach may be more appropriate.