Parveen Kumar1, Gerren K McDonald1, Radhika Chitkara1, Alan M Steinman1, Phillip F Gardiner1, Gordon G Giesbrecht2. 1. Laboratory for Exercise and Environmental Medicine, Faculty of Kinesiology and Recreation Management, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada (all authors); and the Gupta Faculty of Kinesiology and Applied Health, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada (Mr McDonald). 2. Laboratory for Exercise and Environmental Medicine, Faculty of Kinesiology and Recreation Management, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada (all authors); and the Gupta Faculty of Kinesiology and Applied Health, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada (Mr McDonald). Electronic address: giesbrec@cc.umanitoba.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to determine the effectiveness of Fluidotherapy rewarming through the distal extremities for mildly hypothermic, vigorously shivering subjects. Fluidotherapy is a dry heat modality in which cellulose particles are suspended by warm air circulation. METHODS: Seven subjects (2 female) were cooled on 3 occasions in 8˚C water for 60 minutes, or to a core temperature of 35°C. They were then dried and rewarmed in a seated position by 1) shivering only; 2) Fluidotherapy applied to the distal extremities (46 ± 1°C, mean ± SD); or 3) water immersion of the distal extremities (44 ± 1°C). The order of rewarming followed a balanced design. Esophageal temperature, skin temperature, heart rate, oxygen consumption, and heat flux were measured. RESULTS: The warm water produced the highest rewarming rate, 6.1°C·h(-1), 95% CI: 5.3-6.9, compared with Fluidotherapy, 2.2°C·h(-1), 95% CI: 1.4-3.0, and shivering only, 2.0°C·h(-1), 95% CI: 1.2-2.8. The Fluidotherapy and warm water conditions increased skin temperature and inhibited shivering heat production, thus reducing metabolic heat production (166 ± 42 W and 181 ± 45 W, respectively), compared with shivering only (322 ± 142 W). Warm water provided a significantly higher net heat gain (398.0 ± 52 W) than shivering only (288.4 ± 115 W). CONCLUSIONS: Fluidotherapy was not as effective as warm water for rewarming mildly hypothermic subjects. Although Fluidotherapy is more portable and technically simpler, it provides a lower rate of rewarming that is similar to shivering only. It does help decrease shivering heat production, lowering energy expenditure and cardiac work, and could be considered in a hospital setting, if convenient.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to determine the effectiveness of Fluidotherapy rewarming through the distal extremities for mildly hypothermic, vigorously shivering subjects. Fluidotherapy is a dry heat modality in which cellulose particles are suspended by warm air circulation. METHODS: Seven subjects (2 female) were cooled on 3 occasions in 8˚C water for 60 minutes, or to a core temperature of 35°C. They were then dried and rewarmed in a seated position by 1) shivering only; 2) Fluidotherapy applied to the distal extremities (46 ± 1°C, mean ± SD); or 3) water immersion of the distal extremities (44 ± 1°C). The order of rewarming followed a balanced design. Esophageal temperature, skin temperature, heart rate, oxygen consumption, and heat flux were measured. RESULTS: The warm water produced the highest rewarming rate, 6.1°C·h(-1), 95% CI: 5.3-6.9, compared with Fluidotherapy, 2.2°C·h(-1), 95% CI: 1.4-3.0, and shivering only, 2.0°C·h(-1), 95% CI: 1.2-2.8. The Fluidotherapy and warm water conditions increased skin temperature and inhibited shivering heat production, thus reducing metabolic heat production (166 ± 42 W and 181 ± 45 W, respectively), compared with shivering only (322 ± 142 W). Warm water provided a significantly higher net heat gain (398.0 ± 52 W) than shivering only (288.4 ± 115 W). CONCLUSIONS: Fluidotherapy was not as effective as warm water for rewarming mildly hypothermic subjects. Although Fluidotherapy is more portable and technically simpler, it provides a lower rate of rewarming that is similar to shivering only. It does help decrease shivering heat production, lowering energy expenditure and cardiac work, and could be considered in a hospital setting, if convenient.
Authors: Marius Brazaitis; Henrikas Paulauskas; Albertas Skurvydas; Henning Budde; Laura Daniuseviciute; Nerijus Eimantas Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 4.566