Maley Matthew J, Costello Joseph T, Borg David N, Bach Aaron J E, Hunt Andrew P, Stewart Ian B
Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Extreme Environments Laboratory, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Front Physiol. 2017 Nov 9;8:913. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00913. eCollection 2017.
A commercial chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) protective covert garment has recently been developed with the aim of reducing thermal strain. A covert CBRN protective layer can be worn under other clothing, with equipment added for full chemical protection when needed. However, it is unknown whether the covert garment offers any alleviation to thermal strain during work compared with a traditional overt ensemble. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare thermal strain and work tolerance times during work in an overt and covert ensemble offering the same level of CBRN protection. : Eleven male participants wore an overt (OVERT) or covert (COVERT) CBRN ensemble and walked (4 km·h, 1% grade) for a maximum of 120 min in either a wet bulb globe temperature [WBGT] of 21, 30, or 37°C (Neutral, WarmWet and HotDry, respectively). The trials were ceased if the participants' gastrointestinal temperature reached 39°C, heart rate reached 90% of maximum, walking time reached 120 min or due to self-termination. All participants completed 120 min of walking in Neutral. Work tolerance time was greater in OVERT compared with COVERT in WarmWet ( < 0.001, 116.5[9.9] vs. 88.9[12.2] min, respectively), though this order was reversed in HotDry ( = 0.003, 37.3[5.3] vs. 48.4[4.6] min, respectively). The rate of change in mean body temperature and mean skin temperature was greater in COVERT (0.025[0.004] and 0.045[0.010]°C·min, respectively) compared with OVERT (0.014[0.004] and 0.027[0.007]°C·min, respectively) in WarmWet ( < 0.001 and = 0.028, respectively). However, the rate of change in mean body temperature and mean skin temperature was greater in OVERT (0.068[0.010] and 0.170[0.026]°C·min, respectively) compared with COVERT (0.059[0.004] and 0.120[0.017]°C·min, respectively) in HotDry ( = 0.002 and < 0.001, respectively). Thermal sensation, thermal comfort, and ratings of perceived exertion did not differ between garments at trial cessation ( > 0.05). Those dressed in OVERT experienced lower thermal strain and longer work tolerance times compared with COVERT in a warm-wet environment. However, COVERT may be an optimal choice in a hot-dry environment. These findings have practical implications for those making decisions on the choice of CBRN ensemble to be used during work.
最近研发出了一种商业用的化学、生物、放射和核(CBRN)防护隐蔽服装,旨在减轻热应激。隐蔽的CBRN防护层可穿在其他衣物下面,必要时可添加设备以实现全面化学防护。然而,与传统的外露套装相比,尚不清楚这种隐蔽服装在工作期间是否能缓解热应激。因此,本研究的目的是比较提供相同水平CBRN防护的外露和隐蔽套装在工作期间的热应激和工作耐受时间。11名男性参与者穿着外露(OVERT)或隐蔽(COVERT)的CBRN套装,在湿球黑球温度(WBGT)分别为21、30或37°C(分别为中性、暖湿和干热)的环境中以4 km·h、1%坡度行走,最长行走120分钟。如果参与者的胃肠道温度达到39°C、心率达到最大值的90%、行走时间达到120分钟或因自我终止,则试验停止。所有参与者在中性环境中都完成了120分钟的行走。在暖湿环境中,外露套装的工作耐受时间比隐蔽套装更长(P<0.001,分别为116.5[9.9]分钟和88.9[12.2]分钟),但在干热环境中此顺序相反(P = 0.003,分别为37.3[5.3]分钟和48.4[4.6]分钟)。在暖湿环境中,隐蔽套装的平均体温和平均皮肤温度变化率(分别为0.025[0.004]和0.045[0.010]°C·分钟)高于外露套装(分别为0.014[0.004]和0.027[0.007]°C·分钟)(分别为P<0.001和P = 0.028)。然而,在干热环境中,外露套装的平均体温和平均皮肤温度变化率(分别为0.068[0.010]和0.170[0.026]°C·分钟)高于隐蔽套装(分别为0.059[0.004]和0.120[0.017]°C·分钟)(分别为P = 0.002和P<0.001)。试验结束时,两种服装的热感觉、热舒适度和主观用力程度评分没有差异(P>0.05)。在暖湿环境中,与隐蔽套装相比,穿着外露套装的人热应激较低,工作耐受时间更长。然而,在干热环境中,隐蔽套装可能是最佳选择。这些发现对于那些在工作期间选择CBRN套装做出决策的人具有实际意义。