Cargando…
Validity of inner canthus temperature recorded by infrared thermography as a non-invasive surrogate measure for core temperature at rest, during exercise and recovery()
Research into obtaining a fast, valid, reliable and non-invasive measure of core temperature is of interest in many disciplinary fields. Occupational and sports medicine research has attempted to determine a non-invasive proxy for core temperature particularly when access to participants is limited...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier Ltd.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7117007/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27839549 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2016.09.010 |
Sumario: | Research into obtaining a fast, valid, reliable and non-invasive measure of core temperature is of interest in many disciplinary fields. Occupational and sports medicine research has attempted to determine a non-invasive proxy for core temperature particularly when access to participants is limited and thermal safety is of a concern due to protective encapsulating clothing, hot ambient environments and/or high endogenous heat production during athletic competition. This investigation aimed to determine the validity of inner canthus of the eye temperature (T(EC)) as an alternate non-invasive measure of intestinal core temperature (T(C)) during rest, exercise and post-exercise conditions. Twelve physically active males rested for 30 min prior to exercise, performed 60 min of aerobic exercise at 60% V̇O(2max) and passively recovered a further 60 min post-exercise. T(EC) and T(C) were measured at 5 min intervals during each condition. Mean differences between T(EC) and T(C) were 0.61 °C during pre-exercise, −1.78 °C during exercise and −1.00 °C during post-exercise. The reliability between the methods was low in the pre-exercise (ICC=0.49 [−0.09 to 0.82]), exercise (ICC=−0.14 [−0.65 to 0.44]) and post-exercise (ICC=−0.25 [−0.70 to 0.35]) conditions. In conclusion, poor agreement was observed between the T(EC) values measured through IRT and T(C) measured through a gastrointestinal telemetry pill. Therefore, T(EC) is not a valid substitute measurement to gastrointestinal telemetry pill in sports and exercise science settings. |
---|