RESUMEN
CONTEXT: Rapid diagnosis and expeditious cooling of individuals with exertional heat stroke is paramount for survival. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of various cooling systems after exercise-induced hyperthermia. DESIGN: Crossover study. SETTING: Laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-two men (age = 24 ± 2 years, height = 1.76 ± 0.07 m, mass = 70.7 ± 9.5 kg) participated. INTERVENTION(S): Each participant completed a treadmill walk until body core temperature reached 39.50°C. The treadmill walk was performed at 5.3 km/h on an 8.5% incline for 50 minutes and then at 5.0 km/h until the end of exercise. Each participant experienced 4 cooling phases in a randomized, repeated-crossover design: (1) no cooling (CON), (2) body-cooling unit (BCU), (3) EMCOOLS Flex.Pad (EC), and (4) ThermoSuit (TS). Cooling continued for 30 minutes or until body core temperature reached 38.00°C, whichever occurred earlier. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Body core temperature (obtained via an ingestible telemetric temperature sensor) and heart rate were measured continuously during the exercise and cooling phases. Rating of perceived exertion was monitored every 5 minutes during the exercise phase and thermal sensation every minute during the cooling phase. RESULTS: The absolute cooling rate was greatest with TS (0.16°C/min ± 0.06°C/min) followed by EC (0.12°C/min ± 0.04°C/min), BCU (0.09°C/min ± 0.06°C/min), and CON (0.06°C/min ± 0.02°C/min; P < .001). The TS offered a greater cooling rate than all other cooling modalities in this study, whereas EC offered a greater cooling rate than both CON and BCU (P < .0083 for all). Effect-size calculations, however, showed that EC and BCU were not clinically different. CONCLUSION: These findings provide objective evidence for selecting the most effective cooling system of those we evaluated for cooling individuals with exercise-induced hyperthermia. Nevertheless, factors other than cooling efficacy need to be considered when selecting an appropriate cooling system.