What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Other. Population: Healthy (n=35). Intervention: Unfavorable indoor air temperatures (18°C, 26°C, 30°C) vs. Moderate indoor air temperature (22°C). Primary outcome: Accuracy of working memory (N-back test) at high workload (30°C vs 22°C) (MD 10.55, p=<0.001).

January 23, 2019Open Access

The impact of indoor air temperature on the executive functions of human brain and the physiological responses of body

Q: What are the key findings of this study?

Exposure to unfavorable indoor air temperatures (30°C and 18°C) significantly reduced the accuracy of working memory and increased physiological stress responses compared to a moderate temperature of 22°C.

AAAli AbbasiAbbVie (United States)MMMajid MotamedzadeShahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences and Health Services MAMohsen AliabadiClayton State University

Key Result

Exposure to unfavorable indoor air temperatures (30°C and 18°C) significantly reduced the accuracy of working memory and increased physiological stress responses compared to a moderate temperature of 22°C.

Structured PICO

Does exposure to unfavorable indoor air temperatures affect executive functions and physiological responses in male students?

Population

35 healthy male university students aged 20 to 30 years, free of neuropsychiatric diseases, evaluated in a controlled air-conditioning chamber.

Exposure

Exposure to high (30°C) and low (18°C) air temperature conditions in an air conditioning chamber

Comparator

Moderate air temperature (22°C)

Outcome

Accuracy of brain executive functions (N-back test), response time to stimuli, heart beat rate, ECG signals (LF/HF, SNND, RMSSD), and respiration ratesurrogate

Unfavorable indoor air temperatures (18°C and 30°C) significantly impair cognitive executive functions compared to moderate temperatures (22°C), highlighting the importance of thermal comfort for indoor performance.

Main Result

Mean Difference: 10.55

Absolute Event Rate: 71.99% vs 82.52%

p-value: p=<0.001

Limitations

All participants were young males, limiting generalizability to females and older workers.
The laboratory setting may not fully reflect real-world office environments.
Participants may have demonstrated their best performance due to the experimental setting, potentially masking some adverse effects.

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to investigate the effect size (ES) of air temperature on the executive functions of human brain and body physiological responses. Methods: In this empirical study, the participants included 35 male students who were exposed to 4 air temperature conditions of 18°C, 22°C, 26°C and 30°C in 4 separate sessions in an air conditioning chamber. The participants were simultaneously asked to take part in the N-backtest. The accuracy, electrocardiogram (ECG) signals and the respiration rate were recorded to determine the effect of air temperature. Results: Compared to moderate air temperatures (22°C), high (30°C) and low (18°C) air temperatures had a much more profound effect on changes in heart beat rate, the accuracy of brain executive functions and the response time to stimuli. There were statistically significant differences in the accuracy by different workload levels and various air temperature conditions(P0.05). Conclusion: The results confirmed that the unfavorable air temperatures may considerably affect the physiological responses and the cognitive functions among indoor employees.Therefore, providing them with thermal comfort may improve their performance within indoor environments.

Ask AI

Helpful

Bookmark

View Full Paper