Medicine and science in sports and exercise · 2026
Driver Cooling Strategies to Mitigate Heat Illness in Motorsports: Physiological Impacts and Recommendations.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Davis Aidan R, Breach-Teji Jodie, Faltus Abigail L, Boettcher Amy E, Gulbransen Gabriel D, Marchal Shannon, Pluszczynski Gabriella M, Xhaja Sara, Ferguson David P
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Each year, over 1 million individuals participate in automobile racing and are at an increased risk of heat illness due to the physical effort to pilot the vehicle while wearing a fire protective suit in a hot cockpit. To date, there has been no investigation into the various methods advertised to mitigate heat stress in drivers.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of three driver cooling strategies-cool shirt, helmet blower, and suit blower-during heat exposure, and to determine their impact on thermal stress in a laboratory setting.
METHODS: Physically fit participants completed six 60-min cycling trials in a heat chamber (32°C, 80% relative humidity) while wearing full fire-protective racing gear. Trials included five cooling strategies (cool shirt, helmet blower with ambient or cold air, suit blower with ambient or cold air) and a control (no cooling) condition. Core temperature, skin temperature, heart rate, and Physiological Strain Index were recorded. Ambient air trials were discontinued after three participants due to safety concerns.
RESULTS: After 60 min of exercise, the suit blower with cold air (34.85 ± 0.11°C) had the lowest ( P < 0.001) skin temperature, followed by the cool shirt (37.99 ± 0.11°C), then the helmet blower with cold air (38.71 ± 0.04°C) and finally the control condition (39.74 ± 0.04°C). Core temperature was the lowest ( P < 0.001) in the suit blower (cold air) condition (37.51 ± 0.04°C), followed by the helmet blower (cold air) condition (38.05 ± 0.04°C), then the control condition (38.32 ± 0.04°C), and finally, the cool shirt condition (38.58 ± 0.04°C).
CONCLUSIONS: The suit blower with cold air is the most effective strategy for mitigating thermal strain. helmet blowers also offer substantial benefits, while cool shirts provide limited cooling.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of three driver cooling strategies-cool shirt, helmet blower, and suit blower-during heat exposure, and to determine their impact on thermal stress in a laboratory setting.
METHODS: Physically fit participants completed six 60-min cycling trials in a heat chamber (32°C, 80% relative humidity) while wearing full fire-protective racing gear. Trials included five cooling strategies (cool shirt, helmet blower with ambient or cold air, suit blower with ambient or cold air) and a control (no cooling) condition. Core temperature, skin temperature, heart rate, and Physiological Strain Index were recorded. Ambient air trials were discontinued after three participants due to safety concerns.
RESULTS: After 60 min of exercise, the suit blower with cold air (34.85 ± 0.11°C) had the lowest ( P < 0.001) skin temperature, followed by the cool shirt (37.99 ± 0.11°C), then the helmet blower with cold air (38.71 ± 0.04°C) and finally the control condition (39.74 ± 0.04°C). Core temperature was the lowest ( P < 0.001) in the suit blower (cold air) condition (37.51 ± 0.04°C), followed by the helmet blower (cold air) condition (38.05 ± 0.04°C), then the control condition (38.32 ± 0.04°C), and finally, the cool shirt condition (38.58 ± 0.04°C).
CONCLUSIONS: The suit blower with cold air is the most effective strategy for mitigating thermal strain. helmet blowers also offer substantial benefits, while cool shirts provide limited cooling.