Relative clinical heat transfer effectiveness: Forced-air warming(Warm Touch TM) vs. Conductive fabric electric warming(HOT DOG TM).

Relative clinical heat transfer effectiveness: Forced-air warming(Warm Touch TM) vs. Conductive fabric electric warming(HOT DOG TM). - Relative clinical heat transfer effectiveness: Forced-air warming(Warm Touch TM) vs. Conductive fabric electric warming(HOT DOG TM).

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

JPRN

Registry ID

JPRN-UMIN000021761

Enrollment

Registered

2016-04-04

Start date

2016-04-04

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

perioperative hypothermia

Interventions

Forced-air warming(Warm Touch TM) Conductive fabric electric warming(HOT DOG TM)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Patients(ASA PS 1-2) undergoing GI or gynecologic surgical procedures lasting more than 2 hours

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria were: ASA 3 and 4, BMI (kg/m2) <17 and >30, and the use of fluid warming

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
The warming rates of Tympanic temperatures were recorded at 15 minute intervals, starting when the blankets were energized.	—

Countries

Japan

Contacts

Public ContactHaruko Sugai

Sapporo medical university school of medicine Anesthesiology

hayashi.haruko@sapmed.ac.jp011-688-9663

Outcome results

None listed

Source: JPRN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jul 3, 2026