Efficacy of Nonpharmacological Antishivering Interventions: A Systematic Analysis

• Published in: Critical care medicine Vol. 43; no. 8; p. 1757
• Main Authors: Park, Bomi, Lee, Taehoon, Berger, Karen, Park, Sea Mi, Choi, Ko-Eun, Goodsell, Thomas M, Rosengart, Axel
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.08.2015
• Subjects: Humans; Hypothermia - physiopathology; Hypothermia - prevention & control; Hypothermia, Induced; Perioperative Care - methods; Shivering
• ISSN: 1530-0293
• DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001014

We performed a systematic review of the published evidence regarding nonpharmacologic antishivering interventions in various clinical settings. Studies through November 2014 were identified using predefined search terms in electronic databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE: Excerpta Medica (Ovid), and Web of Science. All identified articles were critically analyzed by applying prespecified criteria. We included experimental trials with comparable baseline data investigating the antishivering efficacy of nonpharmacological interventions in subjects without underlying thermoregulatory dysfunction. Sixty-five publications (3,361 subjects) were analyzed by the type of clinical setting, intervention, comparison, and study design. In addition, each study underwent a standardized study quality assessment. Nonpharmacological interventions consisted of active cutaneous warming (forced-air warming, electric heating pad/blanket, radiant heating, and water-circulating mattress), body core warming (fluid or gas warming system), passive cutaneous warming (space blankets or towels), and electroacupuncture. Identified clinical settings included perioperative settings without induced hypothermia (60 of 77 comparisons), perioperative settings with induced hypothermia (8 of 77), and induced hypothermia without anesthesia (9 of 77). Active cutaneous warming was the most commonly studied intervention, and it was associated with the highest prevalence of positive results when compared with controls in all three clinical settings. In contrast, passive cutaneous warming and body core warming showed conflicting efficacy. Comparison evaluations among different antishivering interventions were limited due to the paucity and heterogeneity of studies directly comparing different interventions against one another. This systematic review of the effectiveness of nonpharmacological antishivering methods delineates active cutaneous warming as the most effective nonpharmacologic antishivering intervention in the perioperative and induced hypothermia settings.