Physiological responses and parasympathetic reactivation in rescue interventions: The effect of the breathing apparatus

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the effect of wearing a breathing apparatus during a simulated rescue intervention on psychophysiological responses and parasympathetic reactivation of firefighters. Thirty-four firefighters participated in this study which consisted of four experimental sessions conducted randomly: a maximal fitness test and three rescue interventions performed (a) with personal protective clothing (PPC); (b) with PPC and the full self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA), including cylinder, full-face piece, and breathing regulator; and (c) with PPC and only the cylinder of the self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBAc). Physiological (heart rate [HR], breathing frequency [BF]) and perceptual (rating of perceived exertion [RPE]) responses were continuously collected during the three rescue interventions. Parasympathetic reactivation was assessed using HR recovery and variability indexes after experimental sessions. HR responses ranged between 63% and 95% of HR , and BF responses ranged between 22 and 55 breaths/min for the different activity tasks. Parasympathetic reactivation indexes were similar for the rescue interventions but lower than after the intermittent fitness test (P = 0.016 - P < 0.0001). Mean HR for both SCBAc (83.2 ± 4.1%HR ) and SCBA (83.1 ± 5.2%HR ) was higher in comparison with PPC (79.5 ± 5.3%HR ). RPE was higher for SCBA than for SCBAc which was higher than PPC. Mean BF for SCBA (34 breaths/min) was lower than PPC (40 breaths/min) and SCBAc (43 breaths/min). Based on HR, BF, and RPE, rescue interventions seem to be psychologically and physiologically stressful. Parasympathetic reactivation after PCC, SCBA, and SCBAc suggests that these conditions induce higher cardiac stress than the maximal fitness test. The study showed that SCBA increased psychophysiological perturbations.

Relationships Between Heart Rate Variability, Occupational Performance, and Fitness for Tactical Personnel: A Systematic Review

“…Selected publications included males only in 11 studies, both males and females in seven studies and the gender distribution was not reported in three studies. Seven tactical subpopulations were represented; general law enforcement officers ( 32 , 33 ), Army ( 27 , 29 , 31 , 34 – 36 , 46 ), Defense Force trainees ( 37 ), Naval cadets ( 38 ), Army Ranger trainees ( 39 ) firefighters/rescue personnel ( 28 , 30 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 45 ), and Air Force fighter pilots ( 42 ). Specifically, the Army personnel were members of either the US, Brazilian or Spanish militaries.…”

“…For the Fire/Rescue personnel, members were serving in French, Brazilian, Finnish, Portuguese, or South Korean communities. A total of nine countries were represented: USA ( 27 , 32 , 33 ), Spain ( 29 , 31 , 34 , 35 ), Brazil ( 30 , 36 , 42 , 46 ), South Africa ( 37 ), Norway ( 38 ), France ( 28 , 39 ), Finland ( 40 , 41 ), Portugal ( 43 , 44 ), and South Korea ( 45 ).…”

“…The root-mean square of successive differences (RMSSD) was the most popular time-domain analysis, with 11 studies documenting this HRV characteristic. Other time-domain analyses included pNN20 ( 54 ), pNN50 ( 30 , 35 , 37 , 54 ), mean interbeat interval, or AVNN ( 36 , 37 , 39 , 43 , 46 , 54 ), or SDNN/SDRR ( 28 , 37 , 39 , 41 , 42 , 45 , 54 ).…”

“…Three study design methodologies were utilized in the selected studies. Quasi-experimental studies (27)(28)(29) and case-control studies (30,31) represented a total of four included studies. All other studies were of a cohort design.…”

Contact-Based Methods for Measuring Respiratory Rate

“…Technological development is driving an increasing interest in the monitoring of workers during their activities, with the aim to improve health, well-being, and safety. Various multiparameter wearable devices measuring fR have been developed and tested with the aim of monitoring workers facing high levels of psychophysiological stress [17,18]. Monitoring fR during working activities is of great value because fR is sensitive to cognitive load, emotional stress, environmental challenges, pain, and discomfort, among other factors [3,19].…”