We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Tarp-Assisted Cooling as a Method of Whole-Body Cooling in Hyperthermic Individuals.
Annals of Emergency Medicine 2017 March
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We investigated the efficacy of tarp-assisted cooling as a body cooling modality.
METHODS: Participants exercised on a motorized treadmill in hot conditions (ambient temperature 39.5°C [103.1°F], SD 3.1°C [5.58°F]; relative humidity 38.1% [SD 6.7%]) until they reached exercise-induced hyperthermia. After exercise, participants were cooled with either partial immersion using a tarp-assisted cooling method (water temperature 9.20°C [48.56°F], SD 2.81°C [5.06°F]) or passive cooling in a climatic chamber.
RESULTS: There were no differences in exercise duration (mean difference=0.10 minutes; 95% CI -5.98 to 6.17 minutes or end exercise rectal temperature (mean difference=0.10°C [0.18°F]; 95% CI -0.05°C to 0.25°C [-0.09°F to 0.45°F] between tarp-assisted cooling (48.47 minutes [SD 8.27 minutes]; rectal temperature 39.73°C [103.51°F], SD 0.27°C [0.49°F]) and passive cooling (48.37 minutes [SD 7.10 minutes]; 39.63°C [103.33°F], SD 0.40°C [0.72°F]). Cooling time to rectal temperature 38.25°C (100.85°F) was significantly faster in tarp-assisted cooling (10.30 minutes [SD 1.33 minutes]) than passive cooling (42.78 [SD 5.87 minutes]). Cooling rates for tarp-assisted cooling and passive cooling were 0.17°C/min (0.31°F/min), SD 0.07°C/min (0.13°F/min) and 0.04°C/min (0.07°F/min), SD 0.01°C/min (0.02°F/min), respectively (mean difference=0.13°C [0.23°F]; 95% CI 0.09°C to 0.17°C [0.16°F to 0.31°F]. No sex differences were observed in tarp-assisted cooling rates (men 0.17°C/min [0.31°F/min], SD 0.07°C/min [0.13°F/min]; women 0.16°C/min [0.29°F/min], SD 0.07°C/min [0.13°F/min]; mean difference=0.02°C/min [0.04°F/min]; 95% CI -0.06°C/min to 0.10°C/min [-0.11°F/min to 0.18°F/min]). Women (0.04°C/min [0.07°F/min], SD 0.01°C/min [0.02°F/min]) had greater cooling rates than men (0.03°C/min [0.05°F/min], SD 0.01°C/min [0.02°F/min]) in passive cooling, with negligible clinical effect (mean difference=0.01°C/min [0.02°F/min]; 95% CI 0.001°C/min to 0.024°C/min [0.002°F/min to 0.04°F/min]). Body mass was moderately negatively correlated with the cooling rate in passive cooling (r=-0.580) but not in tarp-assisted cooling (r=-0.206).
CONCLUSION: In the absence of a stationary cooling method such as cold-water immersion, tarp-assisted cooling can serve as an alternative, field-expedient method to provide on-site cooling with a satisfactory cooling rate.
METHODS: Participants exercised on a motorized treadmill in hot conditions (ambient temperature 39.5°C [103.1°F], SD 3.1°C [5.58°F]; relative humidity 38.1% [SD 6.7%]) until they reached exercise-induced hyperthermia. After exercise, participants were cooled with either partial immersion using a tarp-assisted cooling method (water temperature 9.20°C [48.56°F], SD 2.81°C [5.06°F]) or passive cooling in a climatic chamber.
RESULTS: There were no differences in exercise duration (mean difference=0.10 minutes; 95% CI -5.98 to 6.17 minutes or end exercise rectal temperature (mean difference=0.10°C [0.18°F]; 95% CI -0.05°C to 0.25°C [-0.09°F to 0.45°F] between tarp-assisted cooling (48.47 minutes [SD 8.27 minutes]; rectal temperature 39.73°C [103.51°F], SD 0.27°C [0.49°F]) and passive cooling (48.37 minutes [SD 7.10 minutes]; 39.63°C [103.33°F], SD 0.40°C [0.72°F]). Cooling time to rectal temperature 38.25°C (100.85°F) was significantly faster in tarp-assisted cooling (10.30 minutes [SD 1.33 minutes]) than passive cooling (42.78 [SD 5.87 minutes]). Cooling rates for tarp-assisted cooling and passive cooling were 0.17°C/min (0.31°F/min), SD 0.07°C/min (0.13°F/min) and 0.04°C/min (0.07°F/min), SD 0.01°C/min (0.02°F/min), respectively (mean difference=0.13°C [0.23°F]; 95% CI 0.09°C to 0.17°C [0.16°F to 0.31°F]. No sex differences were observed in tarp-assisted cooling rates (men 0.17°C/min [0.31°F/min], SD 0.07°C/min [0.13°F/min]; women 0.16°C/min [0.29°F/min], SD 0.07°C/min [0.13°F/min]; mean difference=0.02°C/min [0.04°F/min]; 95% CI -0.06°C/min to 0.10°C/min [-0.11°F/min to 0.18°F/min]). Women (0.04°C/min [0.07°F/min], SD 0.01°C/min [0.02°F/min]) had greater cooling rates than men (0.03°C/min [0.05°F/min], SD 0.01°C/min [0.02°F/min]) in passive cooling, with negligible clinical effect (mean difference=0.01°C/min [0.02°F/min]; 95% CI 0.001°C/min to 0.024°C/min [0.002°F/min to 0.04°F/min]). Body mass was moderately negatively correlated with the cooling rate in passive cooling (r=-0.580) but not in tarp-assisted cooling (r=-0.206).
CONCLUSION: In the absence of a stationary cooling method such as cold-water immersion, tarp-assisted cooling can serve as an alternative, field-expedient method to provide on-site cooling with a satisfactory cooling rate.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app