Indicators to assess physiological heat strain – Part 3: Multi-country field evaluation and consensus recommendations
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Indicators to assess physiological heat strain – Part 3: Multi-country field evaluation and consensus recommendations. / Ioannou, Leonidas; Tsoutsoubi, Lydia; Mantzios, Konstantinos; Vliora, Maria; Nintou, Eleni; Piil, Jacob Feder; Notley, Sean R; Dinas, Petros C; Gourzoulidis, George A; Havenith, George; Brearley, Matt; Mekjavic, Igor B; Kenny, Glen P; Nybo, Lars; Flouris, Andreas D.
In: Temperature, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2022, p. 274-291.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Indicators to assess physiological heat strain – Part 3: Multi-country field evaluation and consensus recommendations
AU - Ioannou, Leonidas
AU - Tsoutsoubi, Lydia
AU - Mantzios, Konstantinos
AU - Vliora, Maria
AU - Nintou, Eleni
AU - Piil, Jacob Feder
AU - Notley, Sean R
AU - Dinas, Petros C
AU - Gourzoulidis, George A
AU - Havenith, George
AU - Brearley, Matt
AU - Mekjavic, Igor B
AU - Kenny, Glen P
AU - Nybo, Lars
AU - Flouris, Andreas D
N1 - CURIS 2022 NEXS 123
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - In a series of three companion papers published in this Journal, we identify and validate the available thermal stress indicators (TSIs). In this third paper, we conducted field experiments across nine countries to evaluate the efficacy of 61 meteorology-based TSIs for assessing the physiological strain experienced by individuals working in the heat. We monitored 372 experienced and acclimatized workers during 893 full work shifts. We continuously assessed core bodytemperature, mean skin temperature, and heart rate data together with pre/post urine specific gravity and color. The TSIs were evaluated against 17 published criteria covering physiological parameters, practicality, cost effectiveness, and health guidance issues. Simple meteorological parameters explained only a fraction of the variance in physiological heat strain (R2 = 0.016 to 0.427; p < 0.001), reflecting the importance of adopting more sophisticated TSIs. Nearly all TSIs correlated with mean skin temperature (98%), mean body temperature (97%), and heart rate (92%), while 66% of TSIs correlated with the magnitude of dehydration and 59% correlated with core body temperature (r = 0.031 to 0.602; p < 0.05). When evaluated against the 17 published criteria, the TSIs scored from 4.7 to 55.4% (max score = 100%). The indoor (55.4%) and outdoor (55.1%) Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature and the Universal Thermal Climate Index (51.7%) scored higher compared to other TSIs (4.7 to 42.0%). Therefore, these three TSIs have the highest potential to assess the physiological strain experienced by individuals working in the heat.
AB - In a series of three companion papers published in this Journal, we identify and validate the available thermal stress indicators (TSIs). In this third paper, we conducted field experiments across nine countries to evaluate the efficacy of 61 meteorology-based TSIs for assessing the physiological strain experienced by individuals working in the heat. We monitored 372 experienced and acclimatized workers during 893 full work shifts. We continuously assessed core bodytemperature, mean skin temperature, and heart rate data together with pre/post urine specific gravity and color. The TSIs were evaluated against 17 published criteria covering physiological parameters, practicality, cost effectiveness, and health guidance issues. Simple meteorological parameters explained only a fraction of the variance in physiological heat strain (R2 = 0.016 to 0.427; p < 0.001), reflecting the importance of adopting more sophisticated TSIs. Nearly all TSIs correlated with mean skin temperature (98%), mean body temperature (97%), and heart rate (92%), while 66% of TSIs correlated with the magnitude of dehydration and 59% correlated with core body temperature (r = 0.031 to 0.602; p < 0.05). When evaluated against the 17 published criteria, the TSIs scored from 4.7 to 55.4% (max score = 100%). The indoor (55.4%) and outdoor (55.1%) Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature and the Universal Thermal Climate Index (51.7%) scored higher compared to other TSIs (4.7 to 42.0%). Therefore, these three TSIs have the highest potential to assess the physiological strain experienced by individuals working in the heat.
KW - Faculty of Science
KW - Occupational
KW - Heat strain
KW - Work
KW - Labor
KW - Temperature
KW - Hyperthermia
KW - Thermal indices
KW - Heat indices
KW - Criteria
KW - Core temperature
KW - Skin temperature
KW - Dehydration
KW - Heart rate
U2 - 10.1080/23328940.2022.2044739
DO - 10.1080/23328940.2022.2044739
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 36249710
VL - 9
SP - 274
EP - 291
JO - Temperature
JF - Temperature
SN - 2332-8940
IS - 3
ER -
ID: 304784630