Henriksson Otto, Lundgren Peter J, Kuklane Kalev, Holmér Ingvar, Giesbrecht Gordon G, Naredi Peter, Bjornstig Ulf
Division of Surgery, Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden (Drs Henriksson, Lundgren, Naredi, and Bjornstig).
Division of Surgery, Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden (Drs Henriksson, Lundgren, Naredi, and Bjornstig).
Wilderness Environ Med. 2015 Mar;26(1):11-20. doi: 10.1016/j.wem.2014.07.001.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of wet clothing removal or the addition of a vapor barrier in shivering subjects exposed to a cold environment with only limited insulation available.
Volunteer subjects (n = 8) wearing wet clothing were positioned on a spineboard in a climatic chamber (-18.5°C) and subjected to an initial 20 minutes of cooling followed by 30 minutes of 4 different insulation interventions in a crossover design: 1) 1 woolen blanket; 2) vapor barrier plus 1 woolen blanket; 3) wet clothing removal plus 1 woolen blanket; or 4) 2 woolen blankets. Metabolic rate, core body temperature, skin temperature, and heart rate were continuously monitored, and cold discomfort was evaluated at 5-minute intervals.
Wet clothing removal or the addition of a vapor barrier significantly reduced metabolic rate (mean difference ± SE; 14 ± 4.7 W/m(2)) and increased skin temperature rewarming (1.0° ± 0.2°C). Increasing the insulation rendered a similar effect. There were, however, no significant differences in core body temperature or heart rate among any of the conditions. Cold discomfort (median; interquartile range) was significantly lower with the addition of a vapor barrier (4; 2-4.75) and with 2 woolen blankets (3.5; 1.5-4) compared with 1 woolen blanket alone (5; 3.25-6).
In protracted rescue scenarios in cold environments with only limited insulation available, wet clothing removal or the use of a vapor barrier is advocated to limit the need for shivering thermogenesis and improve the patient's condition on admission to the emergency department.
本研究旨在评估在仅有有限保暖措施的寒冷环境中,去除湿衣物或添加防潮层对寒颤受试者的影响。
8名穿着湿衣服的志愿者受试者被放置在气候舱(-18.5°C)的脊柱板上,先进行20分钟的冷却,然后采用交叉设计进行4种不同保暖干预措施各30分钟:1)1条羊毛毯;2)防潮层加1条羊毛毯;3)去除湿衣物加1条羊毛毯;或4)2条羊毛毯。持续监测代谢率、核心体温、皮肤温度和心率,并每隔5分钟评估一次寒冷不适情况。
去除湿衣物或添加防潮层显著降低了代谢率(平均差值±标准误;14±4.7W/m²),并加快了皮肤温度回升(1.0°±0.2°C)。增加保暖措施也产生了类似效果。然而,在任何条件下,核心体温或心率均无显著差异。与仅使用1条羊毛毯(中位数;四分位间距)(5;3.25 - 6)相比,添加防潮层(4;2 - 4.75)和使用2条羊毛毯(3.5;1.5 - 4)时,寒冷不适情况明显减轻。
在仅有有限保暖措施的寒冷环境中进行长时间救援时,提倡去除湿衣物或使用防潮层,以减少寒颤产热的需求,并改善患者入院时的状况。