Physical characteristics cannot be used to predict cooling time using cold-water immersion as a treatment for exertional hyperthermia
Poirier MP, Notley SR, Flouris AD, Kenny GP
Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism = Physiologie appliquee, nutrition et metabolisme · 8 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Cohort study (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2018-03-12 · Appl Physiol Nutr Metab · vol. 43 · issue 8 · pp. 857–860
- Publisher
- NRC Research Press
- Cited
- 9 citations · more than 59% of similar papers · 0.4× the field average
- References
- 15 works
- Access
- Paywalled
- Research areas
- Thermoregulation and physiological responses · Climate Change and Health Impacts · Infrared Thermography in Medicine
- Keywords
- Hyperthermia, Rectal temperature, Immersion (mathematics), Residual, Medicine, Materials science, Environmental science, Internal medicine, Mathematics
- MeSH
- humans, fever, body weight, treatment outcome, hydrotherapy, retrospective studies, immersion, body temperature regulation, running, time factors, adult, female, male, cold temperature, physical exertion, young adult
4 authors
From CA, GR
- Martin P. PoirierUniversity of Ottawa
- Sean R. NotleyUniversity of Ottawa
- Andreas D. FlourisUniversity of Thessaly; Center for Research and Technology Thessaly; e-Trikala (Greece)
- Glen Patrick Kenny · correspondingUniversity of Ottawa; Ottawa Hospital; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
Abstract
We examined if physical characteristics could be used to predict cooling time during cold water immersion (CWI, 2 °C) following exertional hyperthermia (rectal temperature ≥39.5 °C) in a physically heterogeneous group of men and women (n = 62). Lean body mass was the only significant predictor of cooling time following CWI (R2 = 0.137; P < 0.001); however, that prediction did not provide the precision (mean residual square error: 3.18 ± 2.28 min) required to act as a safe alternative to rectal temperature measurements.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.