ABSTRACT
Coastal environments present dynamic challenges necessitating rapid and efficient responses during aquatic emergencies. Lifeguards, as pivotal links in the intervention chain, rely on various tools, with rescue time being paramount. The choice of fins, specifically long versus short ones, plays a critical role in optimizing lifeguard performance during rescues. This randomized cross-over study explores the impact of flipper size on ocean rescues, employing a sample of 14 lifeguards. Long fins (LFs) and short fins (SFs) were compared in terms of rescue time (RT) and physiological load (PL). Tests included ocean rescues without fins (R), with LF (R-LF), and with SF (R-SF). Variables recorded encompassed swim approach time, tow-in time, overall rescue time, perceived exertion rates (RPEs), and post-rescue lactate concentration. Long fins demonstrated superior performance in swim approach and tow-in times compared to both short fins and no fins (p < 0.001). Overall rescue time favored long fins significantly (p < 0.001), indicating their efficiency in practical ocean rescue scenarios. Physiologically, long fins induced lower perceived exertion in arms (p = 0.033) compared to short fins. Lactate concentrations post-rescue revealed no significant differences (p > 0.05). This study demonstrates that long fins significantly improve lifeguard performance during ocean rescues, reducing rescue times and alleviating arm fatigue.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A technique called in-water resuscitation (IWR) was devised on a surfboard to ventilate persons who seemingly did not breathe upon a water rescue. Despite IWR still raises uncertainties regarding its applicability, this technique is recommended by the International Liaison Committee for Resuscitation (ILCOR). Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of IWR with a rescue board before and during towing and, to compare rescue times and rescue-associated fatigue levels between rescues with rescue breath attempts and without (SR). METHODS: A randomized crossover pilot test was conducted: 1) IWR test with pocket mask and, 2) Conventional SR test. IWR tests were conducted using a Laerdal ResusciAnne manikin (Stavanger, Norway). Three groups of variables were recorded: a) rescue time (in s), b) effective ventilations during rescue, and c) rating of perceived effort (RPE). RESULTS: Focusing on the rescue time, the performance SR was significantly faster than IWR rescue which took 61 s longer to complete the rescue (Z = -2.805; p = 0.005). No significant differences were found between techniques for the RPE (T = -1.890; p = 0.095). In the IWR analysis, lifeguards performed an average of 27 ± 12 rescue breaths. CONCLUSION: The application of IWR on a rescue board is feasible both at the time of rescue and during towing. It shortens the reoxygenation time but delays the arrival time to shore. Both IWR and SR result in similar levels of perceived fatigue.
