JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maglinger, P. E.
Right arrow Articles by Lenhardt, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Maglinger, P. E.
Right arrow Articles by Lenhardt, R.
Related Collections
Right arrow Equipment
Right arrow Technology

Anesth Analg 2005;100:738-742
© 2005 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000143954.98285.63

TECHNOLOGY, COMPUTING, AND SIMULATION

Cutaneous Heat Loss with Three Surgical Drapes, One Impervious to Moisture

Paul E. Maglinger, BS, Daniel I. Sessler, MD, and Rainer Lenhardt, MD

The Outcomes ResearchTM Institute and the Departments of Anesthesiology and Pharmacology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Daniel I. Sessler, MD, Outcomes ResearchTM Institute, 501 East Broadway, Suite 210, Louisville, KY 40202. Address e-mail to sessler{at}louisville.edu.

A new surgical drape that is impervious to moisture presumably reduces evaporative heat loss. We compared cutaneous heat loss and skin temperature in volunteers covered with this drape to two conventional surgical drapes (Large Surgical Drape and Medline Proxima). We calculated cutaneous heat loss and skin-surface temperatures from 15 area-weighted thermal flux transducers in eight volunteers. In random order, each of the drapes was evaluated with dry transducers and moistened transducers (simulating wet skin). After a 20-min uncovered control period, volunteers were covered from the neck down for 40 min. Data were recorded continuously and averaged over 10 min. Results were similar for all three drapes for dry or moist conditions. Under dry conditions, baseline heat loss was 82 ± 14 W and decreased 30% with a surgical drape (P < 0.001). Under moist conditions, baseline heat loss was 231 ± 45 W and decreased 29% with a drape covering (P < 0.001). Moist skin increased heat loss 282% (P < 0.001). There were no clinically important differences in skin temperature among the covers with dry or moist skin. Moist skin increased heat loss nearly three-fold, but there were no differences among the drapes. We conclude that loss is comparable with impervious and conventional drapes with either moist or dry skin.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
K. Mizutani and Y. Toyoda
Sterilization Pouches for Perioperative Thermal Insulation
Anesth. Analg., November 1, 2005; 101(5): 1561 - 1561.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2005 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.