Nye Emma A, Edler Jessica R, Eberman Lindsey E, Games Kenneth E
Department of Applied Medicine and Rehabilitation, Sycamore Center for Wellness and Applied Medicine, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
J Athl Train. 2016 Jun 2;51(6):500-1. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-51.9.04. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
Reference: Zhang Y, Davis JK, Casa DJ, Bishop PA. Optimizing cold water immersion for exercise-induced hyperthermia: a meta-analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015;47(11):2464-2472. Clinical Questions: Do optimal procedures exist for implementing cold-water immersion (CWI) that yields high cooling rates for hyperthermic individuals?
One reviewer performed a literature search using PubMed and Web of Science. Search phrases were cold water immersion, forearm immersion, ice bath, ice water immersion, immersion, AND cooling.
Studies were included based on the following criteria: (1) English language, (2) full-length articles published in peer-reviewed journals, (3) healthy adults subjected to exercise-induced hyperthermia, and (4) reporting of core temperature as 1 outcome measure. A total of 19 studies were analyzed.
Pre-immersion core temperature, immersion water temperature, ambient temperature, immersion duration, and immersion level were coded a priori for extraction. Data originally reported in graphical form were digitally converted to numeric values. Mean differences comparing the cooling rates of CWI with passive recovery, standard deviation of change from baseline core temperature, and within-subjects r were extracted. Two independent reviewers used the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale to assess the risk of bias.
Cold-water immersion increased the cooling rate by 0.03°C/min (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.03, 0.04°C/min) compared with passive recovery. Cooling rates were more effective when the pre-immersion core temperature was ≥38.6°C (P = .023), immersion water temperature was ≤10°C (P = .036), ambient temperature was ≥20°C (P = .013), or immersion duration was ≤10 minutes (P < .001). Cooling rates for torso and limb immersion (mean difference = 0.04°C/min, 95% CI = 0.03, 0.06°C/min) were higher (P = .028) than those for forearm and hand immersion (mean difference = 0.01°C/min, 95% CI = -0.01, 0.04°C/min).
Hyperthermic individuals were cooled twice as fast by CWI as by passive recovery. Therefore, the former method is the preferred choice when treating patients with exertional heat stroke. Water temperature should be <10°C, with the torso and limbs immersed. Insufficient published evidence supports CWI of the forearms and hands.
参考文献:张Y、戴维斯JK、卡萨DJ、毕晓普PA。优化冷水浸泡用于运动性体温过高:一项荟萃分析。《运动医学与科学》。2015年;47(11):2464 - 2472。临床问题:对于体温过高的个体,是否存在能产生高冷却速率的实施冷水浸泡(CWI)的最佳程序?
一名审阅者使用PubMed和科学网进行文献检索。检索短语为冷水浸泡、前臂浸泡、冰浴、冰水浸泡、浸泡和冷却。
根据以下标准纳入研究:(1)英文;(2)发表在同行评审期刊上的全文文章;(3)经历运动性体温过高的健康成年人;(4)将核心体温报告作为一项结果指标。共分析了19项研究。
预先设定对浸泡前核心体温、浸泡水温、环境温度、浸泡持续时间和浸泡水平进行编码以便提取。最初以图形形式报告的数据被数字转换为数值。提取了比较CWI与被动恢复的冷却速率的平均差异、基线核心体温变化的标准差以及受试者内相关系数。两名独立审阅者使用物理治疗证据数据库(PEDro)量表评估偏倚风险。
与被动恢复相比,冷水浸泡使冷却速率提高了0.03°C/分钟(95%置信区间[CI]=0.03,0.04°C/分钟)。当浸泡前核心体温≥38.6°C(P = 0.023)、浸泡水温≤10°C(P = 0.036)、环境温度≥20°C(P = 0.013)或浸泡持续时间≤10分钟(P < 0.001)时,冷却速率更有效。躯干和肢体浸泡的冷却速率(平均差异 = 0.04°C/分钟,95% CI = 0.03,0.06°C/分钟)高于(P = 0.028)前臂和手部浸泡的冷却速率(平均差异 = 0.01°C/分钟,95% CI = -0.01,0.04°C/分钟)。
体温过高的个体通过CWI冷却的速度是被动恢复的两倍。因此,在治疗劳力性热射病患者时,前一种方法是首选。水温应<10°C,浸泡躯干和四肢。公开证据不足支持前臂和手部的CWI。