Suppr超能文献

静息、运动、冷水浸泡及恢复过程中三个直肠深度核心温度测量的有效性

Validity of Core Temperature Measurements at 3 Rectal Depths During Rest, Exercise, Cold-Water Immersion, and Recovery.

作者信息

Miller Kevin C, Hughes Lexie E, Long Blaine C, Adams William M, Casa Douglas J

机构信息

Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant.

University of Connecticut, Storrs.

出版信息

J Athl Train. 2017 Apr;52(4):332-338. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-52.2.10. Epub 2017 Feb 16.

Abstract

CONTEXT

No evidence-based recommendation exists regarding how far clinicians should insert a rectal thermistor to obtain the most valid estimate of core temperature. Knowing the validity of temperatures at different rectal depths has implications for exertional heat-stroke (EHS) management.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether rectal temperature (T) taken at 4 cm, 10 cm, or 15 cm from the anal sphincter provides the most valid estimate of core temperature (as determined by esophageal temperature [T]) during similar stressors an athlete with EHS may experience.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Laboratory.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

Seventeen individuals (14 men, 3 women: age = 23 ± 2 years, mass = 79.7 ± 12.4 kg, height = 177.8 ± 9.8 cm, body fat = 9.4% ± 4.1%, body surface area = 1.97 ± 0.19 m).

INTERVENTION(S): Rectal temperatures taken at 4 cm, 10 cm, and 15 cm from the anal sphincter were compared with T during a 10-minute rest period; exercise until the participant's T reached 39.5°C; cold-water immersion (∼10°C) until all temperatures were ≤38°C; and a 30-minute postimmersion recovery period. The T and T were compared every minute during rest and recovery. Because exercise and cooling times varied, we compared temperatures at 10% intervals of total exercise and cooling durations for these periods.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The T and T were used to calculate bias (ie, the difference in temperatures between sites).

RESULTS

Rectal depth affected bias (F = 6.8, P = .008). Bias at 4 cm (0.85°C ± 0.78°C) was higher than at 15 cm (0.65°C ± 0.68°C, P < .05) but not higher than at 10 cm (0.75°C ± 0.76°C, P > .05). Bias varied over time (F = 79.5, P < .001). Bias during rest (0.42°C ± 0.27°C), exercise (0.23°C ± 0.53°C), and recovery (0.65°C ± 0.35°C) was less than during cooling (1.72°C ± 0.65°C, P < .05). Bias during exercise was less than during postimmersion recovery (0.65°C ± 0.35°C, P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

When EHS is suspected, clinicians should insert the flexible rectal thermistor to 15 cm (6 in) because it is the most valid depth. The low level of bias during exercise suggests T is valid for diagnosing hyperthermia. Rectal temperature is a better indicator of pelvic organ temperature during cold-water immersion than is T.

摘要

背景

对于临床医生应将直肠热敏电阻插入多深以获得最准确的核心体温估计值,目前尚无基于证据的建议。了解不同直肠深度体温的有效性对劳力性热射病(EHS)的管理具有重要意义。

目的

确定在类似压力源下,从肛门括约肌起4厘米、10厘米或15厘米处测量的直肠温度(T)是否能最准确地估计EHS运动员可能经历的核心体温(由食管温度[T]确定)。

设计

横断面研究。

地点

实验室。

患者或其他参与者

17人(14名男性,3名女性:年龄=23±2岁,体重=79.7±12.4千克,身高=177.8±9.8厘米,体脂=9.4%±4.1%,体表面积=1.97±0.19平方米)。

干预措施

在10分钟休息期、运动至参与者的T达到39.5°C、冷水浸泡(约10°C)直至所有温度≤38°C以及浸泡后30分钟恢复期内,比较从肛门括约肌起4厘米、10厘米和15厘米处测量的直肠温度与T。在休息和恢复期间每分钟比较T和T。由于运动和冷却时间不同,我们在这些时间段内以总运动和冷却持续时间的10%间隔比较温度。

主要观察指标

用T和T计算偏差(即不同部位温度的差值)。

结果

直肠深度影响偏差(F = 6.8,P = 0.008)。4厘米处的偏差(0.85°C±0.78°C)高于15厘米处(0.65°C±0.68°C,P < 0.05),但不高于10厘米处(0.75°C±0.76°C,P > 0.05)。偏差随时间变化(F = 79.5,P < 0.001)。休息(0.42°C±0.27°C)、运动(0.23°C±0.53°C)和恢复(0.65°C±0.35°C)期间的偏差小于冷却期间(1.72°C±0.65°C,P < 0.05)。运动期间的偏差小于浸泡后恢复期间(0.65°C±0.35°C,P < 0.05)。

结论

当怀疑患有EHS时,临床医生应将柔性直肠热敏电阻插入15厘米(6英寸)深处,因为这是最有效的深度。运动期间偏差水平较低表明T对诊断体温过高有效。在冷水浸泡期间,直肠温度比T更能准确反映盆腔器官温度。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验