Dataset Information

Cooling intervention studies among outdoor occupational groups: A review of the literature.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The purpose of this systematic review is to examine cooling intervention research in outdoor occupations, evaluate the effectiveness of such interventions, and offer recommendations for future studies. This review focuses on outdoor occupational studies conducted at worksites or simulated occupational tasks in climatic chambers.

Methods

This systematic review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched to identify original research on intervention studies published in peer-reviewed journals that aimed at reducing heat stress or heat-related illness from January 2000 to August 2020.

Results

A systematic search yielded a total of 1042 articles, of which 21 met the inclusion criteria. Occupations with cooling intervention studies included agriculture (n = 5), construction (n = 5), industrial workers (n = 4), and firefighters (n = 7). The studies focused on multiple types of cooling interventions cooling gear (vest, bandanas, cooling shirts, or head-cooling gel pack), enhanced heat dissipation clothing, forearm or lower body immersion in cold water, water dousing, ingestion of a crushed ice slush drink, electrolyte liquid hydration, and modified Occupational Safety and Health Administration recommendations of drinking water and resting in the shade.

Conclusion

Current evidence indicates that using multiple cooling gears along with rest cycles may be the most effective method to reduce heat-related illness. Occupational heat-related illnesses and death may be mitigated by targeted cooling intervention and workplace controls among workers of vulnerable occupational groups and industries.

SUBMITTER: Chicas R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7745167 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Outdoor walking groups are widely-used programmes aimed at improving physical activity and health outcomes. Despite being promoted as accessible and inclusive, emerging work highlights participation biases based on gender, age and socioeconomic status, for example. To explicate the impact of outdoor walking groups on physical activity inequities, we conducted a scoping review of published outdoor walking group literatures. Specifically, we critically examined: (a) equity integration strategies; (b) intervention reach; (c) effectiveness; and (d) potential social determinants of engagement relating to the World Health Organization's conceptual framework. Methods:Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review protocol was used to develop a comprehensive search strategy and identify relevant academic and grey literatures, which were screened using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were organised by Cochrane PROGRESS-Plus equity characteristics and a narrative summary was presented for each thematic area. Findings:Sixty-two publications were included. Key findings were: (a) some evidence of targeted intervention trials. Large-scale national programmes were tailored to regional activity and health needs, which may contribute toward addressing inequities. However, participant demographics seldom informed reported analyses; (b) participation was more likely among white, more socioeconomically advantaged, middle-to-older aged, female and able-bodied adults; (c) positive physical and psychological outcomes were unlikely to extend along social gradients; and (d) interventions primarily addressed intermediary determinants (e.g. psychosocial barriers; material resource). Social capital (e.g. friend-making) was identified as potentially important for addressing physical activity inequalities. Conclusions:The published literature on outdoor walking groups leaves unanswered questions regarding participation inequalities, with implications for future physical activity promotion. Currently, participation in outdoor walking groups is typically more prevalent among advantaged subpopulations. We make recommendations for research and practice to address these issues, as well as aid the translation of existing knowledge into practice. We advocate increased focus on the social determinants of engagement. A more consistent approach to collecting and analysing participant socio-demographic data is required. Our findings also support recommendations that appropriate tailoring of universal programmes to community needs and embedding strategies to increase social cohesion are important in developing equitable programmes.