We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Physiological and Perceived Effects of Forearm or Head Cooling During Simulated Firefighting Activity and Rehabilitation.
Journal of Athletic Training 2016 November
CONTEXT: Cooling devices aim to protect firefighters by attenuating a rise in body temperature. Devices for head cooling (HC) while firefighting and forearm cooling (FC) during rehabilitation (RHB) intervals are commonly marketed, but research regarding their efficacy is limited.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the physiological and perceived effects of HC and FC during firefighting drills and RHB.
DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial.
SETTING: Firefighter training center.
PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven male career firefighters (age = 39 ± 7 years; height = 169 ± 7 cm; weight = 95.4 ± 16.8 kg).
INTERVENTION(S): Firefighters were randomly assigned to 1 condition: HC (n = 9), in which participants completed drills wearing a cold gel pack inside their helmet; FC (n = 8), in which participants sat on a collapsible chair with water-immersion arm troughs during RHB; or control (n = 10), in which participants used no cooling devices. Firefighters completed four 15-minute drills (D1-D4) wearing full bunker gear and breathing apparatus. Participants had a 15-min RHB after D2 (RHB1) and D4 (RHB2).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Change (Δ) in gastrointestinal temperature (TGI), heart rate (HR), physiological strain index, and perceived thermal sensation.
RESULTS: The TGI increased similarly in the HC and control groups, respectively (D1: 0.57°C ± 0.41°C, 0.73°C ± 0.30°C; D2: 0.92°C ± 0.28°C, 0.85°C ± 0.27°C; D3: -0.37°C ± 0.34°C, -0.01°C ± 0.72°C; D4: 0.25°C ± 0.42°C, 0.57°C ± 0.26°C; P > .05). The ΔHR, Δ physiological strain index, and Δ thermal sensation were similar between the HC and control groups during drills (P > .05). The FC group demonstrated a decreased TGI compared with the control group after RHB1 (-1.61°C ± 0.35°C versus -0.23°C ± 0.34°C; P < .001) and RHB2 (-1.40°C ± 0.38°C versus -0.38°C ± 0.24°C; P < .001). The physiological strain index score decreased in the FC group compared with the control group after RHB1 (-7.9 ± 1.3 versus -2.6 ± 1.7; P < .001) and RHB2 (-7.9 ± 1.6 versus -3.6 ± 1.1; P < .001), but no differences between groups were demonstrated for ΔHR or Δ thermal sensation (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The HC did not attenuate rises in physiological or perceptual variables during firefighting drills. The FC effectively reduced TGI and the physiological strain index score but not HR or thermal sensation during RHB. Clinicians and firefighters should not recommend the use of HC during firefighting but can consider using FC during RHB intervals in the field.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the physiological and perceived effects of HC and FC during firefighting drills and RHB.
DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial.
SETTING: Firefighter training center.
PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven male career firefighters (age = 39 ± 7 years; height = 169 ± 7 cm; weight = 95.4 ± 16.8 kg).
INTERVENTION(S): Firefighters were randomly assigned to 1 condition: HC (n = 9), in which participants completed drills wearing a cold gel pack inside their helmet; FC (n = 8), in which participants sat on a collapsible chair with water-immersion arm troughs during RHB; or control (n = 10), in which participants used no cooling devices. Firefighters completed four 15-minute drills (D1-D4) wearing full bunker gear and breathing apparatus. Participants had a 15-min RHB after D2 (RHB1) and D4 (RHB2).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Change (Δ) in gastrointestinal temperature (TGI), heart rate (HR), physiological strain index, and perceived thermal sensation.
RESULTS: The TGI increased similarly in the HC and control groups, respectively (D1: 0.57°C ± 0.41°C, 0.73°C ± 0.30°C; D2: 0.92°C ± 0.28°C, 0.85°C ± 0.27°C; D3: -0.37°C ± 0.34°C, -0.01°C ± 0.72°C; D4: 0.25°C ± 0.42°C, 0.57°C ± 0.26°C; P > .05). The ΔHR, Δ physiological strain index, and Δ thermal sensation were similar between the HC and control groups during drills (P > .05). The FC group demonstrated a decreased TGI compared with the control group after RHB1 (-1.61°C ± 0.35°C versus -0.23°C ± 0.34°C; P < .001) and RHB2 (-1.40°C ± 0.38°C versus -0.38°C ± 0.24°C; P < .001). The physiological strain index score decreased in the FC group compared with the control group after RHB1 (-7.9 ± 1.3 versus -2.6 ± 1.7; P < .001) and RHB2 (-7.9 ± 1.6 versus -3.6 ± 1.1; P < .001), but no differences between groups were demonstrated for ΔHR or Δ thermal sensation (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The HC did not attenuate rises in physiological or perceptual variables during firefighting drills. The FC effectively reduced TGI and the physiological strain index score but not HR or thermal sensation during RHB. Clinicians and firefighters should not recommend the use of HC during firefighting but can consider using FC during RHB intervals in the field.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
A Systematic Review of Subclinical Hyperthyroidism Guidelines: a Remarkable Range of Recommendations.European Thyroid Journal 2024 May 2
Nutrition in the intensive care unit: from the acute phase to beyond.Intensive Care Medicine 2024 May 22
The Therapy and Management of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: New Insights on Treatment.Cardiac Failure Review 2024
Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for people with chronic kidney disease and diabetes.Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2024 May 22
Bronchiectasis management in adults: state of the art and future directions.European Respiratory Journal 2024 May 24
Pathophysiological Link and Treatment Implication of Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease.Biomedicines 2024 April 31
2024 update in heart failure.ESC Heart Failure 2024 May 29
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