ArticleJournal of athletic training2023
Rectal Temperature Cooling Using 2 Cold-Water Immersion Preparation Strategies.
Article in Journal of athletic training, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextCold-water immersion (CWI) is essential to treat patients with exertional heatstroke (EHS). Experts recommend that patients with EHS be immersed in water between 1.7°C and 15°C within 30 minutes of collapse. Some clinicians fill cooling tubs several hours before exercise, keep the tub in hot conditions, and then add ice in the event of an EHS emergency. No data exist on whether adding ice to water at the time of treatment is as effective as keeping water in the recommended range.
objectivesTo (1) compare the cooling rates of individuals immersed in a water bath kept at 10°C (CON) or 17°C water with 75.7 L (20 gal) of ice added to it immediately upon immersion (ICE) and (2) examine perceptual responses before, during, and after cooling.
designCrossover study.
settingLaboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER
participantsTwelve individuals (7 men, 5 women; age = 22 ± 2 years, height = 176.0 ± 12.8 cm, mass = 74.5 ± 10.6 kg).
interventionsParticipants exercised in the heat until rectal temperature was 39.5°C. They then immersed themselves in CON (initial water volume = 681 ± 7.6 L, 10.0°C ± 0.03°C) or ICE (initial water volume = 605.7 ± 7.6 L water at 17.0°C ± 0.03°C with 75.7 L ice) until rectal temperature was 38°C. Thermal sensation and environmental symptoms questionnaire (ESQ) responses were recorded before, during, and after exercise and cooling. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Rectal temperature cooling rates, thermal sensation, ESQ responses.
resultsParticipants exercised for similar durations (CON = 39.6 ± 18.2 minutes, ICE = 38.8 ± 14.3 minutes, Z11 = 0.94, P = .38) and had similar thermal sensation and ESQ scores immediately postexercise each day (P values > .05). They cooled quickly and at similar rates in both conditions (CON = 0.20°C ± 0.06°C/min, ICE = 0.21°C ± 0.12°C/min, t12 = 0.72, P = .49). Perception data were similar between conditions during and after cooling (P < .05).
conclusionsClinicians can cool patients with EHS quickly by adding ice to water that has warmed to above expert recommendations. Adding ice to a water bath at the time of EHS emergencies could save time, energy, and resources instead of always maintaining water bath temperatures within expert-recommended ranges.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.