Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Athletic Training logoLink to Journal of Athletic Training
. 1992;27(4):355–359.

A Comparison of Skin Interface Temperature Response Between the ProHeat™ Instant Reusable Hot Pack and the Standard Hydrocollator Steam Pack

Donald Tomaszewski a, Michael J Dandorph b, James Manning c
PMCID: PMC1317288  PMID: 16558193

Abstract

The ProHeat™ reusable hot pack is being used increasingly as a substitute for the standard hydrocollator steam pack. This study evaluated the effects of these two modalities on skin temperature. Seventeen subjects were studied during separate 30-minute applications of a ProHeat pack with a wet barrier, a ProHeat pack with a dry barrier, a hydrocollator pack, and a control pack on their nondominant calf. We measured the skin interface temperature and pack surface temperature during each application with surface thermocouples. The skin interface temperature rise time to the minimum therapeutic temperature (104°F) and the total time at and above the minimum therapeutic temperature, for each application, were analyzed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures (p<.05). The ProHeat pack application, with one layer of wet toweling as a barrier, was not significantly different from the hydrocollator steam pack application. We conclude that the ProHeat pack, prepared with a wet barrier, can be considered a viable alternative to the standard hydrocollator steam pack.

Full text

PDF
355

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. ABRAMSON D. I., MITCHELL R. E., TUCK S., Jr, BELL Y., ZAYS A. M. Changes in blood flow, oxygen uptake and tissue temperatures produced by the topical application of wet heat. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1961 May;42:305–318. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barcroft H., Edholm O. G. The effect of temperature on blood flow and deep temperature in the human forearm. J Physiol. 1943 Jun 30;102(1):5–20. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1943.sp004009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. CROCKFORD G. W., HELLON R. F. Vascular responses of human skin to infra-red radiation. J Physiol. 1959 Dec;149:424–432. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1959.sp006349. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Downey J. A., Darling R. C., Miller J. M. The effects, of heat, cold, and exercise on the peripheral circulation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1968 Jun;49(6):308–314. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. ERDMAN W. J., 2nd, STONER E. K. Comparative heating effects of moistaire and hydrocollator hot packs. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1956 Feb;37(2):71–74. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Greenberg R. S. The effects of hot packs and exercise on local blood flow. Phys Ther. 1972 Mar;52(3):273–278. doi: 10.1093/ptj/52.3.273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. KRUSEN E. M., Jr, WAKIM K. G. Effect of hot packs on peripheral circulation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1950 Mar;31(3):145–150. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Knight K. L., Londeree B. R. Comparison of blood flow in the ankle of uninjured subjects during therapeutic applications of heat, cold, and exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1980 Spring;12(1):76–80. doi: 10.1249/00005768-198021000-00015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Lehmann J. F., Silverman D. R., Baum B. A., Kirk N. L., Johnston V. C. Temperature distributions in the human thigh, produced by infrared, hot pack and microwave applications. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1966 May;47(5):291–299. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lehmann J. F., Warren C. G., Scham S. M. Therapeutic heat and cold. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1974 Mar-Apr;(99):207–245. doi: 10.1097/00003086-197403000-00028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. RANDALL B. F., IMIG C. J., HINES H. M. Effects of some physical therapies on blood flow. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1952 Feb;33(2):73–81. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Athletic Training are provided here courtesy of National Athletic Trainers Association

RESOURCES