{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.058682634730538925, 'fraction_numerical': 0.07265469061876248, 'mean_word_length': 4.424242424242424, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison Of Estimated And Achieved Metabolic Equivalents In Children With Severe Burns: 3359 Board #228 June 2 9 30 AM - 11 00 AM

We measure peak oxygen consumption (VO 2 peak) in children with severe burns via indirect calorimetry. When we can’t measure VO 2 peak, we estimate it using the Cooper equation (CEq). In addition, a pharmacological agent sometimes used in burns to decrease hypermetabolism is propranolol. PURPOSE: It is unknown, how propranolol affects the prediction of VO 2 peak using CEq. Therefore, we compare predictive and measured VO 2 peak and metabolic equivalents (METS) in children with severe burns. METHODS: Children with severe burns were randomly assigned to receive propranolol or no drug during their hospital stay. At discharge, patients underwent a treadmill exercise test using the Bruce protocol. V0 2 peak and METS were measured and compared to predicted values using CEq (male: VO 2 peak = (43.6 x height (cm) 4547.1)/weight (kg)); female: VO 2 peak = (22.5 x height (cm) 1837.8)/weight (kg)). Values are means +/SD. RESULTS: We studied 99 children with burns with admit dates between March 1990 and November 2015; with 46 children receiving propranolol and 53 receiving no drug. Mean age at burn was 12±4 years in the propranolol group and 12±3 years in the control group (p = 0.512). Height was 150±18 cm and 148±17 cm (p = 0.571); total body surface area burned was 44±12 % and 49±12 %, respectively (p = 0.072). Measured VO 2 peak (25.1 ± 5.6 mL/min/kg vs. 22.1 ± 4.9 mL/min/kg, p = 0.005) and METS (7.2 ± 1.6 vs. 6.3 ± 1.4, p = 0.004) were significantly higher in the propranolol group. However, the actual values were lower than the predicted values, with the propranolol group being closer to predicted values (R propranolol: 0.24, R control: 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that patients receiving propranolol can achieve higher V0 2 peak and METS at discharge. However, estimated V0 2 peak and METS using CEq may need to be re-evaluated considering additional factors such as age, gender and body mass index. This study was supported in part by: The National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research 90DPBU0003, 90DP0043; the National Institutes of Health R01-HD49071, P50-GM060338, T32-GM8256; the Department of Defense W81XWH-09-2-0194, W81XWH-14-2-0160; and Shriners Hospitals 84080. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of these agencies.