4.0 Article

High Work Output Combined With High Ambient Temperatures Caused Heat Exhaustion in a Wildland Firefighter Despite High Fluid Intake

Journal

WILDERNESS & ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages 122-125

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.wem.2011.01.008

Keywords

fluid intake; wildland firefighters; heat exhaustion

Funding

  1. United States Forest Service (USFS) and Mineral Resources

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this case study is to examine the physiological/behavioral factors leading up to heat exhaustion in a male wildland firefighter during wildland fire suppression. The participant (24 years old, 173 cm, 70 kg, and 3 years firefighting experience) experienced heat exhaustion following 7 hours of high ambient temperatures and arduous work on the fire line during the month of August. At the time of the heat-related incident (HRI), core temperature was 40.1 degrees C (104.2 degrees F) and skin temperature was 34.4 degrees C (93.9 degrees F). His work output averaged 1067 counts.min(-1) (arbitrary units for measuring activity) for the 7 hours prior to the HRI, a very high rate of work over an extended time period during wildfire suppression. In the 2.5 hours leading up to the heat incident, he was exposed to a mean ambient temperature of 44.6 degrees C (112.3 degrees F), with a maximum temperature of 59.7 degrees C (139.5 degrees F). He consumed an average of 840 mL.h(-1) in the 7 hours leading up to the incident and took an average of 24 +/- 11 drinks.h(-1) (total of 170 drinks). The combined effects of a high work rate and high ambient temperatures resulted in an elevated core temperature and a higher volume and frequency of drinking than typically seen in this population, ultimately ending in heat exhaustion and removal from the fire line. The data demonstrate that heat-related incidents can occur even with aggressive fluid intake during wildland fire suppression.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available