Cargando…

Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery

BACKGROUND: Deep body temperature is a critical indicator of heat strain. However, direct measures are often invasive, costly, and difficult to implement in the field. This study assessed the agreement between deep body temperature estimated from heart rate and that measured directly during repeated...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hunt, Andrew P., Buller, Mark J., Maley, Matthew J., Costello, Joseph T., Stewart, Ian B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6567444/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31196190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40779-019-0208-7
_version_ 1783427078899630080
author Hunt, Andrew P.
Buller, Mark J.
Maley, Matthew J.
Costello, Joseph T.
Stewart, Ian B.
author_facet Hunt, Andrew P.
Buller, Mark J.
Maley, Matthew J.
Costello, Joseph T.
Stewart, Ian B.
author_sort Hunt, Andrew P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Deep body temperature is a critical indicator of heat strain. However, direct measures are often invasive, costly, and difficult to implement in the field. This study assessed the agreement between deep body temperature estimated from heart rate and that measured directly during repeated work bouts while wearing explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) protective clothing and during recovery. METHODS: Eight males completed three work and recovery periods across two separate days. Work consisted of treadmill walking on a 1% incline at 2.5, 4.0, or 5.5 km/h, in a random order, wearing EOD protective clothing. Ambient temperature and relative humidity were maintained at 24 °C and 50% [Wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) (20.9 ± 1.2) °C] or 32 °C and 60% [WBGT (29.0 ± 0.2) °C] on the separate days, respectively. Heart rate and gastrointestinal temperature (T(GI)) were monitored continuously, and deep body temperature was also estimated from heart rate (ECTemp). RESULTS: The overall systematic bias between T(GI) and ECTemp was 0.01 °C with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of ±0.64 °C and a root mean square error of 0.32 °C. The average error statistics among participants showed no significant differences in error between the exercise and recovery periods or the environmental conditions. At T(GI) levels of (37.0–37.5) °C, (37.5–38.0) °C, (38.0–38.5) °C, and > 38.5 °C, the systematic bias and ± 95% LoA were (0.08 ± 0.58) °C, (− 0.02 ± 0.69) °C, (− 0.07 ± 0.63) °C, and (− 0.32 ± 0.56) °C, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate acceptable validity of the ECTemp up to 38.5 °C. Conducting work within an ECTemp limit of 38.4 °C, in conditions similar to the present study, would protect the majority of personnel from an excessive elevation in deep body temperature (> 39.0 °C).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6567444
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65674442019-06-20 Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery Hunt, Andrew P. Buller, Mark J. Maley, Matthew J. Costello, Joseph T. Stewart, Ian B. Mil Med Res Research BACKGROUND: Deep body temperature is a critical indicator of heat strain. However, direct measures are often invasive, costly, and difficult to implement in the field. This study assessed the agreement between deep body temperature estimated from heart rate and that measured directly during repeated work bouts while wearing explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) protective clothing and during recovery. METHODS: Eight males completed three work and recovery periods across two separate days. Work consisted of treadmill walking on a 1% incline at 2.5, 4.0, or 5.5 km/h, in a random order, wearing EOD protective clothing. Ambient temperature and relative humidity were maintained at 24 °C and 50% [Wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) (20.9 ± 1.2) °C] or 32 °C and 60% [WBGT (29.0 ± 0.2) °C] on the separate days, respectively. Heart rate and gastrointestinal temperature (T(GI)) were monitored continuously, and deep body temperature was also estimated from heart rate (ECTemp). RESULTS: The overall systematic bias between T(GI) and ECTemp was 0.01 °C with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of ±0.64 °C and a root mean square error of 0.32 °C. The average error statistics among participants showed no significant differences in error between the exercise and recovery periods or the environmental conditions. At T(GI) levels of (37.0–37.5) °C, (37.5–38.0) °C, (38.0–38.5) °C, and > 38.5 °C, the systematic bias and ± 95% LoA were (0.08 ± 0.58) °C, (− 0.02 ± 0.69) °C, (− 0.07 ± 0.63) °C, and (− 0.32 ± 0.56) °C, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate acceptable validity of the ECTemp up to 38.5 °C. Conducting work within an ECTemp limit of 38.4 °C, in conditions similar to the present study, would protect the majority of personnel from an excessive elevation in deep body temperature (> 39.0 °C). BioMed Central 2019-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6567444/ /pubmed/31196190 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40779-019-0208-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Hunt, Andrew P.
Buller, Mark J.
Maley, Matthew J.
Costello, Joseph T.
Stewart, Ian B.
Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery
title Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery
title_full Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery
title_fullStr Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery
title_full_unstemmed Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery
title_short Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery
title_sort validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6567444/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31196190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40779-019-0208-7
work_keys_str_mv AT huntandrewp validityofanoninvasiveestimationofdeepbodytemperaturewhenwearingpersonalprotectiveequipmentduringexerciseandrecovery
AT bullermarkj validityofanoninvasiveestimationofdeepbodytemperaturewhenwearingpersonalprotectiveequipmentduringexerciseandrecovery
AT maleymatthewj validityofanoninvasiveestimationofdeepbodytemperaturewhenwearingpersonalprotectiveequipmentduringexerciseandrecovery
AT costellojosepht validityofanoninvasiveestimationofdeepbodytemperaturewhenwearingpersonalprotectiveequipmentduringexerciseandrecovery
AT stewartianb validityofanoninvasiveestimationofdeepbodytemperaturewhenwearingpersonalprotectiveequipmentduringexerciseandrecovery