4.6 Article

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

Journal

MILITARY MEDICAL RESEARCH
Volume 6, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s40779-019-0208-7

Keywords

Protective clothing; Body core temperature; Heat strain; Heat stress; Kalman filter; Explosive ordnance disposal

Funding

  1. Australian Government
  2. US Government through the Technical Support Working Group within the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundDeep 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.MethodsEight 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 5.5km/h, in a random order, wearing EOD protective clothing. Ambient temperature and relative humidity were maintained at 24 degrees C and 50% [Wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) (20.91.2) degrees C] or 32 degrees C and 60% [WBGT (29.00.2) degrees 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 degrees C with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of +/- 0.64 degrees C and a root mean square error of 0.32 degrees 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) degrees C, (37.5-38.0) degrees C, (38.0-38.5) degrees C, and>38.5 degrees C, the systematic bias and +/- 95% LoA were (0.08 +/- 0.58) degrees C, (-0.02 +/- 0.69) degrees C, (-0.07 +/- 0.63) degrees C, and (-0.32 +/- 0.56) degrees C, respectively.Conclusions The findings demonstrate acceptable validity of the ECTemp up to 38.5 degrees C. Conducting work within an ECTemp limit of 38.4 degrees C, in conditions similar to the present study, would protect the majority of personnel from an excessive elevation in deep body temperature (>39.0 degrees C).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available