MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy Of Limb And Neck Cooling For Reducing Thermal And Cardiovascular Strain In Older Adults

2023· article· en· W4387062090 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert D. Meade, Emma R. McCourt, Brodie J. Richards, Nicholas J. Koetje, Nicholas B. Santucci, James J. McCormick, Pierre Boulay, Glen P. Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart rateCore temperatureRandomized controlled trialBlood pressureSurgeryAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-cost cooling interventions are being increasingly recommended as sustainable alternatives to air conditioning during heat waves. These include interventions exploiting the thermal properties of water, such as lower limb immersion and neck cooling, which carry the added benefit that they can be used in low resource settings or during power outages. However, there is currently a lack of empirical evidence to support their efficacy for limiting physiological strain in heat-vulnerable older adults (e.g., in aged care homes). PURPOSE: In this randomized trial (NCT05601713), we evaluated the effects of limb immersion with and without neck cooling on core temperature, cardiovascular strain, and hydration status in older adults during heat exposure. METHODS: Eight older adults (4 women, 72 (SD 5) yrs) completed 3 randomized 6-hour exposures to 38 °C and 35% relative humidity. Trials differed in the cooling strategy employed: no cooling (CTRL), lower limb (mid-calf) immersion in 20 °C water (LIMB), or limb immersion with a damp towel (20 °C) placed around the neck (LIMB+NECK). Cooling was applied intermittently (20 min off, 40 min on). Core temperature (rectal), heart rate, and systolic blood pressure were monitored throughout. Hourly fluid consumption and cumulative fluid loss (% body mass change) were also recorded. Mixed model estimated marginal means were compared between conditions. RESULTS: After 6 hours of heat exposure, core temperature was not different between CTRL (37.9 (0.4)°C) and either LIMB or LIMB+NECK (mean diff and 95% CI vs CTRL: both 0.0 °C [-0.1, 0.2], P ≥ 0.69). By contrast, heart rate was reduced 7 bpm [4, 10] and 5 bpm [2, 8] from CTRL (68 (10) bpm) in LIMB and LIMB+NECK, respectively (P ≤ 0.003). No between-condition differences in systolic pressure were detected (P ≥ 0.37; 115 (10) mm Hg). Compared to CTRL, fluid consumption was reduced 53 mL/hour [9, 96] in LIMB and 71 mL/hour [28, 115] LIMB+NECK (P ≤ 0.018). There were no differences in the change in body mass (P ≥ 0.09; -0.5 (0.9)% body mass). CONCLUSION: Our preliminary data suggest that lower limb immersion with or without neck cooling does not reduce core temperature in older adults resting in the heat. We did, however, observe small but statistically significant reductions in heart rate and improvements in fluid maintenance. FUNDING: Health Canada

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207