Sports Med 2003; 33 (9): 683-698

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 683 1. Historical Overview of the Measurement of Energy Expenditure (EE) Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 684 2. Methods for the Measurement of EE: Overview and Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 685 2.1 Direct versus Indirect Calorimetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 685 2.2 Doubly Labelled Water (Free-Living Indirect Calorimetry) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 685 2.3 Indirect Calorimetry Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 686 2.3.1 Indirect Calorimetry Systems (Portable) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 687 2.4 Heart Rate and EE Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 688 2.5 Questionnaires and Activity Recall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 689 2.6 Motion Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 690 2.6.1 Pedometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 690 2.6.2 Uniaxial Accelerometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 691 2.6.3 Triaxial Accelerometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 691 2.7 Combined Heart Rate and Motion Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 694 3. Evaluation and Practical Recommendations on the Estimation of EE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 695 4. Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 695 This review includes an historical overview of the techniques for measuring Abstract energy expenditure (EE). Following this overview, the ‘gold standard’ method of measuring EE, the doubly labelled water (DLW) method, is emphasised. Other methods, such as direct calorimetry, indirect calorimetry systems, heart rate and EE relationships, questionnaires and activity recall, motion sensors, combined heart rate and motion sensors for the estimation of EE are then highlighted in relation to their validation against the DLW method. The major advantages and disadvantages for each method are then considered. The preferred method to determine EE is likely to depend principally on factors such as the number of study participants to be monitored, the time period of measurements and the finances available. Small study participant numbers over a short period may be measured accurately by means of indirect calorimetric methods (stationary and