Indicators to assess physiological heat strain – Part 2: Delphi exercise
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Indicators to assess physiological heat strain – Part 2: Delphi exercise. / Ioannou, Leonidas G; Dinas, Petros C; Notley, Sean R; Gofa, Flora; Gourzoulidis, George A; Brearley, Matt; Epstein, Yoram; Havenith, George; Sawka, Michael N; Bröde, Peter; Mekjavic, Igor B; Kenny, Glen P; Bernard, Thomas E; Nybo, Lars; Flouris, Andreas D.
In: Temperature, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2022, p. 263-273.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Indicators to assess physiological heat strain – Part 2: Delphi exercise
AU - Ioannou, Leonidas G
AU - Dinas, Petros C
AU - Notley, Sean R
AU - Gofa, Flora
AU - Gourzoulidis, George A
AU - Brearley, Matt
AU - Epstein, Yoram
AU - Havenith, George
AU - Sawka, Michael N
AU - Bröde, Peter
AU - Mekjavic, Igor B
AU - Kenny, Glen P
AU - Bernard, Thomas E
AU - Nybo, Lars
AU - Flouris, Andreas D
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - In a series of three companion papers published in this Journal, we identify and validate the available thermal stress indicators (TSIs). In this second paper of the series, we identified the criteria to consider when adopting a TSI to protect individuals who work in the heat, and we weighed their relative importance using a Delphi exercise with 20 experts. Two Delphi iterations were adequate to reach consensus within the expert panel (Cronbach’s α = 0.86) for a set of 17 criteria with varying weights that should be considered when adopting a TSI to protect individuals who work in the heat. These criteria considered physiological parameters such as core/skin/mean body temperature, heart rate, and hydration status, as well as practicality, cost effectiveness, and health guidance issues. The 17 criteria were distributed across three occupational health-and-safety pillars: (i) contribution to improving occupational health (55% of total importance), (ii) mitigation of worker physiological strain (35.5% of total importance), and (iii) cost-effectiveness (9.5% of total importance). Three criteria [(i) relationship of a TSI with core temperature, (ii) having categories indicating the level of heat stress experienced by workers, and (iii) using its heat stress categories to provide recommendations for occupational safety and health] were considered significantly more important when selecting a TSI for protecting individuals who work in the heat, accumulating 37.2 percentage points. These 17 criteria allow the validation and comparison of TSIs that presently exist as well as those that may be developed in the coming years.
AB - In a series of three companion papers published in this Journal, we identify and validate the available thermal stress indicators (TSIs). In this second paper of the series, we identified the criteria to consider when adopting a TSI to protect individuals who work in the heat, and we weighed their relative importance using a Delphi exercise with 20 experts. Two Delphi iterations were adequate to reach consensus within the expert panel (Cronbach’s α = 0.86) for a set of 17 criteria with varying weights that should be considered when adopting a TSI to protect individuals who work in the heat. These criteria considered physiological parameters such as core/skin/mean body temperature, heart rate, and hydration status, as well as practicality, cost effectiveness, and health guidance issues. The 17 criteria were distributed across three occupational health-and-safety pillars: (i) contribution to improving occupational health (55% of total importance), (ii) mitigation of worker physiological strain (35.5% of total importance), and (iii) cost-effectiveness (9.5% of total importance). Three criteria [(i) relationship of a TSI with core temperature, (ii) having categories indicating the level of heat stress experienced by workers, and (iii) using its heat stress categories to provide recommendations for occupational safety and health] were considered significantly more important when selecting a TSI for protecting individuals who work in the heat, accumulating 37.2 percentage points. These 17 criteria allow the validation and comparison of TSIs that presently exist as well as those that may be developed in the coming years.
KW - Consensus
KW - Criteria
KW - Heat indices
KW - Heat strain
KW - Hyperthermia
KW - Labor
KW - Occupational
KW - Temperature
KW - Thermal indices
KW - Work
U2 - 10.1080/23328940.2022.2044738
DO - 10.1080/23328940.2022.2044738
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 36211947
AN - SCOPUS:85127388655
VL - 9
SP - 263
EP - 273
JO - Temperature
JF - Temperature
SN - 2332-8940
IS - 3
ER -
ID: 303587353