Perceived challenges and barriers for females working in the heat.

Given rising temperatures, globally, heat exposures and catastrophic heat illnesses are a major concern in laborer and industrial sectors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the perceptions of females laboring in the heat regarding challenges and barriers encountered in their respective industries while working in the heat. A consensual qualitative research (CQR) design was employed to gain information related to participant occupational and job characteristics, feelings while working in the heat, adjustments made by employers when they work in the heat, and their experience working in the heat specific to their identified sex. Females were eligible to participate if they were currently employed in an environment that required them to work in the heat. Twelve females participated in a single, 45-60 min one-on-one semi-structured interview. Participants reported working in the manufacturing, agriculture, tourism, and railroad industries. Upon completion of data analysis, one primary theme was identified: heat stress mitigation strategies, which were further broken down into two subthemes of formal strategies provided by the employer and informal strategies driven by the employees. Participants indicated there was a lack of heat stress prevention strategies implemented by their employers, which resulted in employees creating their own strategies to protect themselves and their coworkers from heat stress. Results indicated there are limited heat stress prevention strategies that are provided in industries that include females working in the heat. Unique considerations should be made to protect this population from the dangers of heat stress and must go beyond workers protecting themselves.

The effect of heat mitigation strategies on thermoregulation and productivity during simulated occupational work in the heat in physically active young men.

Purpose: To investigate heat stress mitigation strategies on productivity and thermoregulatory responses during simulated occupational work in the heat. Methods: Thirteen physically active men (age, 25 ± 4 years; body mass,77.8 ± 14.7 kg; VO2peak, 44.5 ± 9.2 ml·kg-1·min-1) completed five randomized-controlled trials in a hot environment (40°C, 40% relative humidity). Each trial was 4.5 h in duration to simulate an outdoor occupational shift. Thermoregulatory responses (heart rate, HR; rectal temperature, Trec; mean skin temperature, Tsk), perceptual responses (rating of perceived exertion, RPE; thermal sensation; thermal comfort; fatigue) and productivity outcomes (box lifting repetitions, time to exhaustion) were examined in the following heat mitigation strategy interventions: (1) simulated solar radiation with limited fluid intake [SUN]; (2) simulated solar radiation with no fluid restrictions [SUN + H2O]; (3) shade (no simulated solar radiation during trial) with no fluid restrictions [SHADE + H2O]; (4) shade and cooling towels during rest breaks with no fluid restrictions [COOL + H2O]; and (5) shade with cooling towels, cooling vest during activity with no fluid restrictions [COOL + VEST + H2O]. Results: [COOL + VEST + H2O] had lower Trec compared to [SUN] [p = 0.004, effect size(ES) = 1.48], [SUN + H2O] (p < 0.001, ES = -1.87), and [SHADE + H2O] (p = 0.001, ES = 1.62). Average Tsk was lower during the treadmill and box lifting activities in the [COOL + VEST + H2O] compared to [SUN] (p < 0.001, ES = 7.92), [SUN + H2O] (p < 0.001,7.96), [SHADE + H2O] (p < 0.001), and [COOL + H2O] (p < 0.001, ES = 3.01). There were performance differences during the [COOL + VEST + H2O] (p = 0.033) and [COOL + H2O] (p = 0.023) conditions compared to [SUN] during phases of the experimental trial, however, there were no differences in total box lifting repetitions between trials (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Our results suggest that during a simulated occupational shift in a laboratory setting, additional heat mitigation strategies ([COOL + VEST + H2O] and [COOL + H2O]) reduced physiological strain and improved box lifting performance to a greater degree than [SUN]. These differences may have been attributed to a larger core to skin temperature gradient or reduction in fatigue, thermal sensation, and RPE during [COOL + H2O] and [COOL + VEST + H2O]. These data suggest that body cooling, hydration, and "shade" (removal of simulated radiant heat) as heat stress mitigation strategies should be considered as it reduces physiological strain while producing no additional harm.