AI Article Synopsis

  • The study identified and validated thermal stress indicators (TSIs) through field experiments involving 372 workers across nine countries, monitoring their physiological responses to heat.
  • Nearly all TSIs showed strong correlations with key health indicators such as mean skin temperature and heart rate, highlighting the limitations of basic meteorological parameters.
  • Among 61 TSIs evaluated, the Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature and Universal Thermal Climate Index scored the highest in assessing heat stress, indicating their effectiveness in monitoring workers' physiological strain.

Article Abstract

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 experi-enced and acclimatized workers during 893 full work shifts. We continuously assessed core body temperature, 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 (R = 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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9559325PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23328940.2022.2044739DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

physiological heat
8
heat strain
8
indicators assess
4
physiological
4
assess physiological
4
strain multi-country
4
multi-country field
4
field evaluation
4
evaluation consensus
4
consensus recommendations
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!