Forced-Air Warming Temperature Settings for Treating Postoperative Hypothermia in the Postanesthesia Care Unit: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hypothermia, defined as a core body temperature below 36 °C, is a common postoperative complication associated with adverse outcomes, including delayed wound healing, infections, and increased bleeding. Objective: This randomized controlled trial evaluated the efficacy of different forced-air warming system temperature settings in treating postoperative hypothermia in the postanesthesia care unit. Methods: A total of 132 patients undergoing elective surgery at Ramathibodi Hospital between April 2023 and May 2024 were randomized into 3 groups (n=44 per group): group C (warming set to 38 °C), group F1 (warming set to 42 °C), and group F2 (warming set to 42 °C, reduced to 38 °C after achieving 36 °C). Tympanic temperature was recorded at 5-minute intervals during rewarming and every 10 minutes after normothermia (≥36 °C) was achieved. The primary outcome was rewarming time. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of temperature drops, hemodynamic parameters, adverse events, and patient comfort scores. Results: Baseline characteristics and clinical variables, including vital signs, were comparable among groups (P>.05). Group F2 achieved the shortest mean rewarming time of 33.3 (SD 13.81) min; however, differences between groups were not statistically significant (P=.460). Group F2 had the lowest incidence of temperature drops below 36 °C after normothermia (1/44, 2.27%; P=.009). Group C had the highest incidence of rewarming exceeding 1 hour (10/44, 22.73%; P=.017). Conclusions: While rewarming times were similar across groups, the protocol using an initial setting of 42 °C followed by a reduction to 38 °C (group F2) effectively minimized temperature drops after normothermia, suggesting its superiority for managing postoperative hypothermia in the postanesthesia care unit.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".