ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine
Randomized comparison between a forced air system and warm water bath for resuscitation of neonatal hypothermic calves with or without oral administration of caffeine.
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Framework for Comprehensive Dairy Calf Health Investigations.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Randomized comparison between a forced air system and warm water bath for resuscitation of neonatal hypothermic calves with or without oral administration of caffeine.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHypothermia is a cause of neonatal calf death in cold climates. Practical and effective rewarming methods are important for bovine health within affected regions. HYPOTHESIS/
objectivesTo compare the rewarming rate and blood analytes (glucose, lactate, and cortisol) of calves resuscitated with forced air with warm water bath, with or without oral administration of caffeine. ANIMALS: Twenty healthy neonatal Holstein bull calves.
methodsIn this randomized, prospective study, calves born healthy and without history of dystocia were cooled to 32°C rectal temperature then thermally resuscitated using either forced air rewarming or warm water bath (40°C) with or without oral administration of caffeine. Rectal temperatures were used to quantify recovery rate. Measurements of glucose, lactate, and cortisol were recorded for every 2°C change in rectal temperature.
resultsRectal temperature decline (0.03°C per minute) and total cooling time (191.0 ± 33.3 minutes) did not significantly differ among treatment groups. Calves were successfully resuscitated to 38°C by either method. Time required to euthermia using warm water was significantly faster (0.1°C per minute; 64.3 ± 17.8 minute; P < .05) than forced air (0.05°C per minute; 123.1 ± 20.0 minutes). Caffeine had no significant effect on resuscitation rate (P = .14; 95% CI, -0.002 to 0.024) in either treatment; however, caffeine was associated with reduced time to euthermia by 8.3 and 10.8 minutes, respectively. Changes in metabolic variables (glucose, lactate, and cortisol), were inversely related to rectal temperature with no statistical significance among rewarming methods. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Although warm water submersion is faster, forced air rewarming is an effective alternative for restoration of euthermia.
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.