BORA - UiB

Bergen Open Research Archive

Comparison of three different prehospital wrapping methods for preventing hypothermia - a crossover study in humans

Bergen Open Research Archive

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Thomassen, Øyvind eng
dc.contributor.author Færevik, Hilde eng
dc.contributor.author Østerås, Øyvind eng
dc.contributor.author Sunde, Geir Arne eng
dc.contributor.author Zakariassen, Erik eng
dc.contributor.author Sandsund, Mariann eng
dc.contributor.author Heltne, Jon-Kenneth eng
dc.contributor.author Brattebø, Guttorm eng
dc.date.accessioned 2012-01-25T15:06:26Z
dc.date.available 2012-01-25T15:06:26Z
dc.date.issued 2011-06-23 eng
dc.identifier.citation Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine 2011, 19:41 en
dc.identifier.issn 1757-7241 eng
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1956/5523
dc.description.abstract Background: Accidental hypothermia increases mortality and morbidity in trauma patients. Various methods for insulating and wrapping hypothermic patients are used worldwide. The aim of this study was to compare the thermal insulating effects and comfort of bubble wrap, ambulance blankets / quilts, and Hibler’s method, a lowcost method combining a plastic outer layer with an insulating layer. Methods: Eight volunteers were dressed in moistened clothing, exposed to a cold and windy environment then wrapped using one of the three different insulation methods in random order on three different days. They were rested quietly on their back for 60 minutes in a cold climatic chamber. Skin temperature, rectal temperature, oxygen consumption were measured, and metabolic heat production was calculated. A questionnaire was used for a subjective evaluation of comfort, thermal sensation, and shivering. Results: Skin temperature was significantly higher 15 minutes after wrapping using Hibler’s method compared with wrapping with ambulance blankets / quilts or bubble wrap. There were no differences in core temperature between the three insulating methods. The subjects reported more shivering, they felt colder, were more uncomfortable, and had an increased heat production when using bubble wrap compared with the other two methods. Hibler’s method was the volunteers preferred method for preventing hypothermia. Bubble wrap was the least effective insulating method, and seemed to require significantly higher heat production to compensate for increased heat loss. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that a combination of vapour tight layer and an additional dry insulating layer (Hibler’s method) is the most efficient wrapping method to prevent heat loss, as shown by increased skin temperatures, lower metabolic rate and better thermal comfort. This should then be the method of choice when wrapping a wet patient at risk of developing hypothermia in prehospital environments. en
dc.language.iso eng eng
dc.publisher BioMed Central eng
dc.rights Attribution CC BY eng
dc.rights.uri http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ eng
dc.title Comparison of three different prehospital wrapping methods for preventing hypothermia - a crossover study in humans eng
dc.type Peer reviewed eng
dc.type Journal article eng
dc.subject.nsi VDP::Medical disciplines: 700::Clinical medical disciplines: 750 eng
dc.subject.nsi VDP::Medical disciplines: 700::Health sciences: 800::Health service and health administration research: 806 eng
dc.rights.holder Copyright 2011 Thomassen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.type.version publishedVersion eng
bora.peerreviewed Peer reviewed eng
bora.cristinID 848247 eng
bibo.doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-19-41 eng
dc.identifier.cristinID 848247 eng
dc.identifier.doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-19-41


Files in this item

 
 

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution CC BY Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution CC BY

Search BORA


Browse

My Account