ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2025
Evaporative microclimate interval cooling reduces heat stress in thermal insulating protective clothing.
Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWater vapour resistance of thermal insulating protective clothing impedes sweat evaporation, the most substantial pathway of heat dissipation for working humans. Consequently, metabolic heat can increase body core temperature rapidly, which can result in life-threatening heat illnesses. The evaporative microclimate cooling method Dry Air Comfort (DAC) has been shown to be very effective for reducing the risk of heat induced illnesses. Aim of this study was to determine whether DAC can also prevent heat stress when used in intervals.
methodsUsing a balanced within-subject design twelve men in protective overalls were randomly assigned (max. 205 min, 25 °C, 50% relative humidity/RH, 0.2 m/s wind speed) to a work-rest schedule (5 × 20 min work respectively rest each; work: treadmill, 3 km/h, 5% incline; handling of loads) without cooling and with insufflating conditioned air (30 °C, < 3% RH, 600 l/min) into an air-diffusing undergarment during rest periods (interval cooling).
resultsWith interval cooling, all participants tolerated the whole exposure time never exceeding a mean core temperature of 38.0 °C. In contrast, without cooling eight subjects had to terminate work because of high core temperatures (39 °C, n = 5), subjective exhaustion or reaching 90% of the maximum individual heart rate (HR; n = 3). All parameters indicated lower heat stress and distinctive heat dissipation with interval cooling: e.g., HR between both conditions differed significantly (p ≤ 0.05; p ≤ 0.01), as were the skin temperatures (p ≤ 0.001). HR decline was more pronounced during rest periods during interval cooling, indicating significant recovery: e.g., 105.1 ± 17.0 b/min vs. 149.7 ± 15.5 b/min (rest 4, 165. min vs. work 4, 145. min, n = 12). Without cooling HR showed only minor recovery: e.g., 138.4 ± 15.0 b/min vs. 158.7 ± 12.3 b/min (rest 4, 165. min vs. work 4, 145. min, n = 8) and exceeded the level of HR in rest periods of interval cooling.
conclusionsInterval heat evaporation during rests periods with the microclimate cooling method DAC was shown to be effective in preventing body heat accumulation during alternating work-rest cycles. The method can improve occupational health and safety of men working in thermal protective clothing.
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.