Sex-based differences in body core temperature response across repeat work bouts in the heat

Work-rest regimens for work in hot environments: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

To limit exposures to occupational heat stress, leading occupational health and safety organizations recommend work-rest regimens to prevent core temperature from exceeding 38°C or increasing by ≥1°C. This scoping review aims to map existing knowledge of the effects of work-rest regimens in hot environments and to propose recommendations for future research based on identified gaps.

METHODS

We performed a search of 10 databases to retrieve studies focused on work-rest regimens under hot conditions.

RESULTS

Forty-nine articles were included, of which 35 were experimental studies. Most studies were conducted in laboratory settings, in North America (71%), on healthy young adults, with 94% of the 642 participants being males. Most studies (66%) employed a protocol duration ≤240 min (222 ± 162 min, range: 37-660) and the time-weighted average wet-bulb globe temperature was 27 ± 4°C (range: 18-34). The work-rest regimens implemented were those proposed by the American Conference of Governmental and Industrial Hygiene (20%), National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (11%), or the Australian Army (3%). The remaining studies (66%) did not mention how the work-rest regimens were derived. Most studies (89%) focused on physical tasks only. Most studies (94%) reported core temperature, whereas only 22% reported physical and/or mental performance outcomes, respectively. Of the 35 experimental studies included, 77% indicated that core temperature exceeded 38°C.

CONCLUSIONS

Although work-rest regimens are widely used, few studies have investigated their physiological effectiveness. These studies were mainly short in duration, involved mostly healthy young males, and rarely considered the effect of work-rest regimens beyond heat strain during physical exertion.

A Systematic Review of Post-Work Core Temperature Cooling Rates Conferred by Passive Rest

Physical work increases energy expenditure, requiring a considerable elevation of metabolic rate, which causes body heat production that can cause heat stress, heat strain, and hyperthermia in the absence of adequate cooling. Given that passive rest is often used for cooling, a systematic search of literature databases was conducted to identify studies that reported post-work core temperature cooling rates conferred by passive rest, across a range of environmental conditions. Data regarding cooling rates and environmental conditions were extracted, and the validity of key measures was assessed for each study. Forty-four eligible studies were included, providing 50 datasets. Eight datasets indicated a stable or rising core temperature in participants (range 0.000 to +0.028 °C min^-1), and forty-two datasets reported reducing core temperature (-0.002 to -0.070 °C min^-1) during passive rest, across a range of Wet-Bulb Globe Temperatures (WBGT). For 13 datasets where occupational or similarly insulative clothing was worn, passive rest resulted in a mean core temperature decrease of -0.004 °C min^-1 (-0.032 to +0.013 °C min^-1). These findings indicate passive rest does not reverse the elevated core temperatures of heat-exposed workers in a timely manner. Climate projections of higher WBGT are anticipated to further marginalise the passive rest cooling rates of heat-exposed workers, particularly when undertaken in occupational attire.

Quantifying the impact of heat on human physical work capacity; part IV: interactions between work duration and heat stress severity

High workplace temperatures negatively impact physical work capacity (PWC). Although PWC loss models with heat based on 1-h exposures are available, it is unclear if further adjustments are required to accommodate repeated work/rest cycles over the course of a full work shift. Therefore, we examined the impact of heat stress exposure on human PWC during a simulated work shift consisting of six 1-h work-rest cycles. Nine healthy males completed six 50-min work bouts, separated by 10-min rest intervals and an extended lunch break, on four separate occasions: once in a cool environment (15 °C/50% RH) and in three different air temperature and relative humidity combinations (moderate, 35 °C/50% RH; hot, 40 °C/50% RH; and very hot, 40 °C/70%). To mimic moderate to heavy workload, work was performed on a treadmill at a fixed heart rate of 130 beats·min^-1. During each work bout, PWC was quantified as the kilojoules expended above resting levels. Over the shift, work output per cycle decreased, even in the cool climate, with the biggest decrement after the lunch break and meal consumption. Expressing PWC relative to that achieved in the cool environment for the same work duration, there was an additional 5(± 4)%, 7(± 6)%, and 16(± 7)% decrease in PWC when work was performed across a full work shift for the moderate, hot, and very hot condition respectively, compared with 1-h projections. Empirical models to predict PWC based on the level of heat stress (Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature, Universal Thermal Climate Index, Psychrometric Wet-Bulb Temperature, Humidex, and Heat Index) and the number of work cycles performed are presented.

Heat tolerance and the validity of occupational heat exposure limits in women during moderate-intensity work

To mitigate excessive rises in core temperature (>1°C) in non heat-acclimatized workers, the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) provide heat stress limits (Action Limit Values; ALV), defined by the wet-bulb globe temperature (WBGT) and a worker's metabolic rate. However, since these limits are based on data from men, their suitability for women remains unclear. We therefore assessed core temperature and heart rate in men (n=19; body surface area-to-mass ratio: 250 (SD 17) cm2/kg) and women (n=15; body surface area-to-mass ratio: 268 (SD 24) cm2/kg) aged 18-45 years during 180-min walking at a moderate metabolic rate (200 W/m2) in WBGTs below (16 and 24°C) and above (28 and 32°C) ACGIH ALV. Sex did not significantly influence (i) rises in core temperature, irrespective of WBGT, (ii) the proportion of participants with rises in core temperature >1°C in environments below ACGIH limits, and (iii) work duration before rises in core temperature exceeded 1°C or volitional termination in environments above ACGIH limits. Although further studies are needed, these findings indicate that for the purpose of mitigating rises in core temperature exceeding recommended limits (>1°C), ACGIH guidelines have comparable effectiveness in non heat-acclimatized men and women when working at a moderate metabolic rate. Novelty points • Sex did not appreciably influence thermal strain nor the proportion of participants with core temperatures exceeding recommended limits. • Sex did not significantly influence tolerance to uncompensable heat stress • Despite originating from data obtained in only men, current occupational heat stress guidance offered comparable effectiveness in men and women.