Kaufman J W, Hamilton R, Dejneka K Y, Askew G K
Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division, Warminster, PA 18974-5000, USA.
Resuscitation. 1995 Jun;29(3):203-14. doi: 10.1016/0300-9572(94)00845-7.
The purpose of this study was to compare the rewarming effectiveness of a radio frequency coil (13.56 MHz) at a specific absorption rate (SAR) of 2.5 W/kg (RF) with warm water immersion (40 degrees C) (WW) and an insulated mummy-type insulating sack (IS) under simulated field conditions. Four male subjects, ages 24-35, were immersed in 10 degrees C water for up to 90 min or until their rectal temperatures (Tre) decreased to 35 degrees C. Each subject had 3 trials in which they were immersed. After each immersion, rewarming was accomplished with either RF, WW, or IS, so that each subject was rewarmed once with each method. Comparisons of the 3 rewarming methods were based on the rate of increase of Tre during rewarming (Tre/t), Tre 60 min after the start of rewarming (Tre60), the time-interval measured from extraction from the water to the end of afterdrop (tad), and the magnitude of any observed Tre afterdrop (Tad). WW had significantly greater Tre/t and Tre60 than either RF or IS (P < 0.03) and a smaller tad than IS (P < 0.05). IS had significantly greater Tad than either WW or RF (P < 0.05). No significant differences in Tre/t, Tre60, or tad were observed between IS and RF. The results of this study indicate that for mildly hypothermic individuals, active rewarming with RF at a SAR of 2.5 W/kg is less effective than WW and roughly equivalent to passive rewarming with IS.
本研究的目的是在模拟现场条件下,比较特定吸收率(SAR)为2.5W/kg的射频线圈(13.56MHz)(RF)、温水浸泡(40摄氏度)(WW)和绝缘木乃伊式保温袋(IS)的复温效果。4名年龄在24 - 35岁的男性受试者被浸泡在10摄氏度的水中长达90分钟,或直至其直肠温度(Tre)降至35摄氏度。每名受试者进行3次浸泡试验。每次浸泡后,分别采用RF、WW或IS进行复温,使得每名受试者每种方法都复温一次。对这三种复温方法的比较基于复温期间Tre的上升速率(Tre/t)、复温开始60分钟后的Tre(Tre60)、从水中取出到体温后降结束所测量的时间间隔(tad)以及观察到的任何Tre后降幅度(Tad)。WW的Tre/t和Tre60显著高于RF或IS(P < 0.03),且tad小于IS(P < 0.05)。IS的Tad显著高于WW或RF(P < 0.05)。IS和RF之间在Tre/t、Tre60或tad方面未观察到显著差异。本研究结果表明,对于轻度低温个体,以2.5W/kg的SAR进行RF主动复温不如WW有效,且大致等同于IS被动复温。