The determinants of thermal comfort in cool water

Difference in Levels of Vitamin D between Indoor and Outdoor Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Vitamin D, its importance in different processes taking place in the human body, the effects of abnormal levels of this hormone, either too low or too high, and the need for supplementation have been extensively researched thus far. Variances in exposure to sunlight can cause vitamin D levels to fluctuate. Indoor activity can be a factor for these fluctuations and can lead to a decrease in vitamin D levels. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis aiming to identify whether indoor compared to outdoor training has a significant influence on vitamin D levels; we also performed subgroup analyses and multivariate meta-regression. The type of training has an impact on vitamin D levels that is influenced by multiple cofounders. In a subgroup analysis not considering cofounders, the mean serum vitamin D was 3.73 ng/mL higher in outdoor athletes, a difference which barely fails to achieve significance (p = 0.052, a total sample size of 5150). The indoor-outdoor difference is only significant (clinically and statistically) when considering studies performed exclusively on Asian athletes (a mean difference of 9.85 ng/mL, p < 0.01, and a total sample size of 303). When performing the analyses within each season, no significant differences are observed between indoor and outdoor athletes. To control for multiple cofounders (the season, latitude, and Asian/Caucasian race) simultaneously, we constructed a multivariate meta-regression model, which estimated a serum vitamin D concentration lower by 4.446 ng/mL in indoor athletes. While a multivariate model suggests that outdoor training is associated with slightly higher vitamin D concentrations when controlling for the season, latitude, and Asian/Caucasian race, the type of training has a numerically and clinically small impact. This suggests that vitamin D levels and the need for supplementation should not be decided based on training type alone.

Thermoregulation and thermal sensation during whole-body water immersion at different water temperatures in healthy individuals: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Severe thermal discomfort may increase risk of drowning due to hypothermia or hyperthermia from prolonged exposure to noxious water temperatures. The importance of using a behavioral thermoregulation model with thermal sensation may predict the thermal load that the human body receives when exposed to various immersive water conditions. However, there is no thermal sensation "gold standard" model specific for water immersion. This scoping review aims to present a comprehensive overview regarding human physiological and behavioral thermoregulation during whole-body water immersion and explore the feasibility for an accepted defined sensation scale for cold and hot water immersion.

METHODS

A standard literary search was performed on PubMed, Google Scholar, and SCOPUS. The words "Water Immersion," "Thermoregulation," "Cardiovascular responses" were used either as independent searched terms and MeSH terms (Medical Subject Headings) or in combination with other text words. The inclusion criteria for clinical trials terms to thermoregulatory measurements (core or skin temperature), whole-body immersion, 18-60 years old and healthy individuals. The prementioned data were analyzed narratively to achieve the overall study objective.

RESULTS

Twenty-three published articles fulfilled the review inclusion/exclusion criteria (with nine measured behavioral responses). Our outcomes illustrated a homogenous thermal sensation in a variety of water temperatures ranges, that was strongly associated with thermal balance, and observed different thermoregulatory responses. This scoping review highlights the impact of water immersion duration on human thermoneutral zone, thermal comfort zone, and thermal sensation.

CONCLUSION

Our findings enlighten the significance of thermal sensation as a health indicator for establishing a behavioral thermal model applicable for water immersion. This scoping review provides insight for the needed development of subjective thermal model of thermal sensation in relation to human thermal physiology specific to immersive water temperature ranges within and outside the thermal neutral and comfort zone.

A novel cooling method using carbon dioxide-rich water after passive heating

In the event of a marked rise in body temperature, it is often necessary to reduce the temperature quickly. One method to rapidly drop body temperature is cold water immersion. Because carbon dioxide (CO₂)-rich water causes cutaneous vasodilation, it may be that CO₂-rich water reduces body temperature faster than fresh water. To test that idea, I compared the effects of CO₂-rich and tap water immersion on auditory canal temperature (T_ac) after passive heating. Nine healthy male subjects participated in the study. Subjects were first immersed for 15 min in a tap water bath at 40 °C to raise body temperature. They then moved to a tap water or CO₂-rich water bath at 30 °C to reduce body temperature. Immersion in 40 °C tap water caused T_ac to rise 0.64 ± 0.11 °C in the tap water session and 0.71 ± 0.25 °C in the CO₂-rich water session (P > 0.05). During the 30 °C water immersion, T_ac declined and was significantly lower in CO₂-rich water than in tap water. Cooling rates were 0.06 ± 0.04 °C/min in tap water and 0.11 ± 0.05 °C/min in CO₂-rich water (P < 0.05). In addition, both thermal sensation (3.2 ± 1.0 vs. 2.1 ± 0.9; P < 0.01) and thermal comfort (1.2 ± 0.4 vs. 2.1 ± 0.8; P < 0.01) were significantly better in CO₂-rich water than tap water. These results suggest that CO₂-rich water immersion reduces T_ac 1.7 times faster than tap water immersion, and that CO₂-rich water immersion cools the body more comfortably than tap water immersion.

Skin Temperature Measurement Using Contact Thermometry: A Systematic Review of Setup Variables and Their Effects on Measured Values

Background: Skin temperature (T_skin) is commonly measured using T_skin sensors affixed directly to the skin surface, although the influence of setup variables on the measured outcome requires clarification. Objectives: The two distinct objectives of this systematic review were (1) to examine measurements from contact T_skin sensors considering equilibrium temperature and temperature disturbance, sensor attachments, pressure, environmental temperature, and sensor type, and (2) to characterise the contact T_skin sensors used, conditions of use, and subsequent reporting in studies investigating sports, exercise, and other physical activity. Data sources and study selection: For the measurement comparison objective, Ovid Medline and Scopus were used (1960 to July 2016) and studies comparing contact T_skin sensor measurements in vivo or using appropriate physical models were included. For the survey of use, Ovid Medline was used (2011 to July 2016) and studies using contact temperature sensors for the measurement of human T_skinin vivo during sport, exercise, and other physical activity were included. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: For measurement comparisons, assessments of risk of bias were made according to an adapted version of the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Comparisons of temperature measurements were expressed, where possible, as mean difference and 95% limits of agreement (LoA). Meta-analyses were not performed due to the lack of a common reference condition. For the survey of use, extracted information was summarised in text and tabular form. Results: For measurement comparisons, 21 studies were included. Results from these studies indicated minor (<0.5°C) to practically meaningful (>0.5°C) measurement bias within the subgroups of attachment type, applied pressure, environmental conditions, and sensor type. The 95% LoA were often within 1.0°C for in vivo studies and 0.5°C for physical models. For the survey of use, 172 studies were included. Details about T_skin sensor setup were often poorly reported and, from those reporting setup information, it was evident that setups widely varied in terms of type of sensors, attachments, and locations used. Conclusions: Setup variables and conditions of use can influence the measured temperature from contact T_skin sensors and thus key setup variables need to be appropriately considered and consistently reported.

Skin Temperature Measurement Using Contact Thermometry: A Systematic Review of Setup Variables and Their Effects on Measured Values

Background: Skin temperature (Tskin) is commonly measured using Tskin sensors affixed directly to the skin surface, although the influence of setup variables on the measured outcome requires clarification. Objectives: The two distinct objectives of this systematic review were (1) to examine measurements from contact Tskin sensors considering equilibrium temperature and temperature disturbance, sensor attachments, pressure, environmental temperature, and sensor type, and (2) to characterise the contact Tskin sensors used, conditions of use, and subsequent reporting in studies investigating sports, exercise, and other physical activity. Data sources and study selection: For the measurement comparison objective, Ovid Medline and Scopus were used (1960 to July 2016) and studies comparing contact Tskin sensor measurements in vivo or using appropriate physical models were included. For the survey of use, Ovid Medline was used (2011 to July 2016) and studies using contact temperature sensors for the measurement of human Tskinin vivo during sport, exercise, and other physical activity were included. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: For measurement comparisons, assessments of risk of bias were made according to an adapted version of the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Comparisons of temperature measurements were expressed, where possible, as mean difference and 95% limits of agreement (LoA). Meta-analyses were not performed due to the lack of a common reference condition. For the survey of use, extracted information was summarised in text and tabular form. Results: For measurement comparisons, 21 studies were included. Results from these studies indicated minor (<0.5°C) to practically meaningful (>0.5°C) measurement bias within the subgroups of attachment type, applied pressure, environmental conditions, and sensor type. The 95% LoA were often within 1.0°C for in vivo studies and 0.5°C for physical models. For the survey of use, 172 studies were included. Details about Tskin sensor setup were often poorly reported and, from those reporting setup information, it was evident that setups widely varied in terms of type of sensors, attachments, and locations used. Conclusions: Setup variables and conditions of use can influence the measured temperature from contact Tskin sensors and thus key setup variables need to be appropriately considered and consistently reported.