Expert consensus on passive heating interventions to promote skeletal muscle strength and mass: a delphi study
Lemos E, Stewart IB, Rodrigues P, Morrison SA, Wharton L, Tyler CJ, Cheung SS, Racinais S, Gordon RJFH, Lloyd A, Périard JD, Goto K, Trajano GS, Minett GM
European journal of applied physiology · 0 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Expert or government fact sheet (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- No health outcome
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- University or hospital
- Queensland University of Technology
Based on 1 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2026-06-15 · Eur J Appl Physiol · vol. 126 · issue 9 · pp. 4919–4937
- Publisher
- Springer Science+Business Media
- Cited
- 0 citations · more than 52% of similar papers · 0.0× the field average
- References
- 57 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Thermoregulation and physiological responses · Exercise and Physiological Responses · Infrared Thermography in Medicine
- Keywords
- Delphi method, Psychological intervention, Delphi, Sports medicine, Intervention (counseling), Knowledge translation, Population
- MeSH
- muscle, skeletal, humans, body temperature, consensus, delphi technique, muscle strength, hot temperature
14 authors
From AU, NZ, SI, GB, CA, FR, QA, JP
- Elisa Cristina LemosQueensland University of Technology
- Ian B. StewartQueensland University of Technology
- Patrick RodriguesUniversity of Waikato
- Shawnda A. MorrisonUniversity of Ljubljana
- Lee WhartonQueensland University of Technology
- Christopher J. TylerUniversity of Roehampton
Abstract
Purpose
Passive heating has emerged as a potential non‑exercise method to support muscle strength and mass, but its application is limited by inconsistent protocols and unclear dosage and safety guidelines. This study used a Delphi methodology to establish expert consensus on key parameters for passive heating interventions targeting neuromuscular and muscle morphology outcomes.
Methods
An international panel of academic experts (≥ 3 peer‑reviewed publications in passive heating and neuromuscular function) completed a two‑round Delphi process. Round 1 gathered open‑ended responses on passive heating strategies, intervention targets, and safety. In Round 2, experts ranked the importance of generated statements. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% ranking a statement as either first or second in importance.
Results
Eleven experts completed Round 1 and ten in Round 2. From 177 qualitative responses, 130 statements were evaluated, with 11 reaching consensus (80-100% agreement; interquartile range = 0-1). Hot‑water immersion was prioritised as the most optimal passive heating modality. Experts agreed on targeting muscle temperatures of 39-40 °C, ~ 60-minute session durations, and once‑daily exposure as key intervention parameters. Strong consensus was also reached for monitoring core temperature and cardiovascular strain (e.g., heart rate, blood pressure) to ensure participant safety. No consensus was reached on a single target population or the total intervention duration.
Conclusion
This Delphi study provides a consensus‑based framework outlining key parameters and safety considerations for passive heating interventions. These findings do not establish efficacy but identify priority variables to inform future experimental research and cautious translation into applied and clinical contexts.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
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.