• J Athl Train · Mar 2016

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Physiologic and Perceptual Responses to Cold-Shower Cooling After Exercise-Induced Hyperthermia.

    • Cory L Butts, Brendon P McDermott, Brian J Buening, Jeffrey A Bonacci, Matthew S Ganio, J D Adams, Matthew A Tucker, and Stavros A Kavouras.
    • University of Arkansas, Fayetteville;
    • J Athl Train. 2016 Mar 1; 51 (3): 252-7.

    ContextExercise conducted in hot, humid environments increases the risk for exertional heat stroke (EHS). The current recommended treatment of EHS is cold-water immersion; however, limitations may require the use of alternative resources such as a cold shower (CS) or dousing with a hose to cool EHS patients.ObjectiveTo investigate the cooling effectiveness of a CS after exercise-induced hyperthermia.DesignRandomized, crossover controlled study.SettingEnvironmental chamber (temperature = 33.4°C ± 2.1°C; relative humidity = 27.1% ± 1.4%).Patients Or Other ParticipantsSeventeen participants (10 male, 7 female; height = 1.75 ± 0.07 m, body mass = 70.4 ± 8.7 kg, body surface area = 1.85 ± 0.13 m(2), age range = 19-35 years) volunteered.Intervention(S)On 2 occasions, participants completed matched-intensity volitional exercise on an ergometer or treadmill to elevate rectal temperature to ≥39°C or until participant fatigue prevented continuation (reaching at least 38.5°C). They were then either treated with a CS (20.8°C ± 0.80°C) or seated in the chamber (control [CON] condition) for 15 minutes.Main Outcome Measure(S)Rectal temperature, calculated cooling rate, heart rate, and perceptual measures (thermal sensation and perceived muscle pain).ResultsThe rectal temperature (P = .98), heart rate (P = .85), thermal sensation (P = .69), and muscle pain (P = .31) were not different during exercise for the CS and CON trials (P > .05). Overall, the cooling rate was faster during CS (0.07°C/min ± 0.03°C/min) than during CON (0.04°C/min ± 0.03°C/min; t16 = 2.77, P = .01). Heart-rate changes were greater during CS (45 ± 20 beats per minute) compared with CON (27 ± 10 beats per minute; t16 = 3.32, P = .004). Thermal sensation was reduced to a greater extent with CS than with CON (F3,45 = 41.12, P < .001).ConclusionsAlthough the CS facilitated cooling rates faster than no treatment, clinicians should continue to advocate for accepted cooling modalities and use CS only if no other validated means of cooling are available.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.