Electric Blanket Use Research Articles

The cost of keeping warm: a relationship between a rise in the cost of domestic energy and burn injuries caused by personal heating equipment

IntroductionDuring 2022–2023, the UK found itself in the midst of a domestic energy crisis, with the average domestic gas and electricity bill rising by 75% between 2019 and 2022. As a result, the use of hot water bottles, radiant heaters, and electric blankets increased. An unintended consequence of this may be an increase in burn injuries caused by misfortune, misuse, or the use of items in a state of disrepair. PurposeThe aim of this study was to explore any increase in referrals to a single burns centre in England for injuries caused by hot water bottles, radiant heaters, or electric blankets. MethodsThis was a retrospective study of a prospectively maintained database of referrals. All referrals between January 2022 and January 2023 were selected and compared with the same period from 2020–2021 (before the rise in energy prices). Referrals were screened for the terms “hot water bottle,” “electric heater,” “electric blanket,” and “heater.” Total referrals in each period, demographic data (age, gender), anatomical location and the mechanism of injury were compared between cohorts. ResultsWe found a statistically significant increase in the number of burns relating to heating implements between 2020/21 and 2022/23, rising from 54 to 81 (p = 0.03) – a 50% increase in injuries. Injuries in working age adults increased significantly (52% to 69%, p < 0.05). The most frequently injured area was the leg (30%) followed by the hand (18%). The commonest type of injury described was scald (72%). We found a moderately-strong correlation between the number of referrals and the average cost of energy in 2022–23. ConclusionThe number of injuries sustained by people using personal heating equipment is significantly increasing, which correlated with the rise in domestic energy prices. The most affected demographic appears to be working age adults, with wider implications around lost work-time yet to be explored. Further prospective, population-based work is indicated to assess the strength of the correlation seen in this study.

Extrinsic factors of pressure injuries in patients during surgery: A frequency matched retrospective study.

This study was to clarify the connection between extrinsic factors and the risk of perioperative pressure injuries (PIs) through the case-control approach, which involved making the intrinsic factors of the patients in the control group with no PIs consistent with those of the case group with PIs. We collected samples from a teaching hospital in Taiwan. We found a total of 132 patients deemed to have developed perioperative PIs. Using 1:2 frequency matching, we matched these cases with patients who had not developed PIs by gender, age, and BMI. Binary logistic regression analysis of the odds ratios of the extrinsic factors and PI risk revealed that the independent variables with statistical significance included duration of anaesthesia 3h, amount of blood loss, use of electric blankets, diastolic blood pressure below 60 mmHg during surgery, and oxyhemoglobin saturation by pulse oximetry (SPO2 ) below 93% during surgery. Emphasis should be placed on cooperation among the medical team during surgery, less use of electric blankets, control over the duration of anaesthesia and blood loss, continuous monitoring of the patient during surgery for any emergencies, and the maintenance of patient diastolic blood pressure and blood oxygen levels to reduce the risk of PIs.

Hydrotherapeutic Heat Application as Support in Febrile Patients: A Scoping Review.

Background: Most often, fever is still treated by lowering body temperature with medication. In complementary and integrative health care, patients are supported during illness to use the positive effects of fever. Accompanying applications from the field of hydrotherapy are often used for gentle cooling, but there are references that warming in fever can also be used as a support. The aim of this scoping review was to identify available evidence on how, when, and why patients with fever are treated with heat application. Methods: The MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, COCHRANE, Google, and Google Scholar databases as well as references of identified literature were searched. As sources of evidence, publications studying patients who received heat application or were kept warm in febrile condition, regardless of medical situation, type of health care setting, and geographical background, were taken into consideration. Results: The literature search identified 1698 publications, of which only 7 were included. Methods of applying heat were the use of electric warming blankets, hot packs, hot-water bottles, or hot water footbaths. Most of the studies on heat application used temperatures of about 40°C and reported significantly lower body temperature after heat application. Conclusions: The literature suggests that hydrotherapeutic heat application is a common and well-appreciated method in Middle Eastern and Asian regions to support febrile patients. Using heat to support the energy-intensive and uncomfortable phase of rising fever may improve comfort, prevent unnecessarily high fever, and save biological energy. Therefore, high-quality studies on the role of heat application in fever are expected to be of high relevance for future fever management guidelines and integrative health care in general.

Electric Blanket Use and Risk of Thyroid Cancer in the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Cohort

Thyroid cancer disproportionally affects more women than men. The aim of this study was to assess whether exposure to extremely low frequency electric magnetic fields from electric blankets (EBs) was associated with the development of thyroid cancer. Data were analyzed from 89,527 women who participated in the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study and who responded to questions concerning prior use of EBs. During a mean follow-up of 12.2 years, 190 incident cases of thyroid cancer were identified. We estimated the hazard ratio (HR) and 95 percent confidence interval (CI) of incident thyroid cancer associated with EB use by Cox’s proportional hazard model, adjusted for selected covariates. A majority, 57 percent, of the women in the cohort reported the use of EBs while sleeping and/or for warming the bed before sleep. No association was found between use of EBs and subsequent risk of thyroid cancer (HR = 0.98, 95 percent CI 0.72–1.32). Duration of EB use measured in years, months, or hours had no effect on risk. These results did not change when the cases were limited to papillary thyroid cancer, the most frequently occurring histologic type. The results of this study do not support possible health hazards of EBs in regards to thyroid cancer risk.

Electric Blankets: Not for Use in Medical Facilities

Q: “We recently had a request from the manager of our in-patient dialysis unit today. She was asking our biomed department to approve the use of electric blankets by patients during the treatments. My manager and our risk manager have tried to convince her that it is dangerous for several reasons, but the manager is persistent. So I’ve been asked to get the opinion of the biomed community. Do any of you allow the use of electric blankets in your facilities?”

Use of electric blankets and association with prevalence of endometrial cancer

The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between electric blanket use and prevalence of endometrial cancer for women. Information relating to women enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative Observational Data Set (n=93 676) used to test the relationship factors associated with endometrial cancer included older age at screening, younger age at last menstrual period, region of domicile (highest prevalence in the South), less than a high school education, lower income, body mass index >25 kg/m, low parity, unopposed use of estrogen, never use of estrogen plus progesterone, past alcohol use, higher percentage of daily calories from fat and any electric blanket use. Following a univariate identification of factors significantly related to endometrial cancer, stepwise logistic regression analysis was performed for those factors with P values of less than 0.001 in the univariate analysis. Using electric blankets was associated with a 15% higher prevalence of endometrial cancer than never having used electric blankets (odds ratio=1.15, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.27). After controlling for variables significantly associated with endometrial cancer, use of electric blankets for 20 years or more was associated with 36% higher prevalence of endometrial cancer (odds ratio=1.36, 95% confidence interval: 1.16-1.59). Although we were unable to determine the duration of electric blanket use before diagnosis of endometrial cancer, we found that women using electric blankets for 20 years or more had a significantly higher prevalence.

Environmental exposures and male infertility

Current studies exploring the association between male infertility and environmental exposures are limited due to inadequate sample sizes, descriptive designs and/or improper control group selection. In addition, while various environmental factors have been associated with detrimental affects on semen parameters, it is unclear whether such factors actually impair the ability of a man to father a child. The aim of this study was to determine whether environmental exposures are associated with male infertility, and to examine the strength of association between environmental exposures on male factor compared to unexplained infertility cases. Retrospective Case-Control This study was performed using data previously collected as part of a large multi-center trial (Reproductive Medicine Network) in which both infertile and fertile couples were recruited from university-based infertility and prenatal clinics. Cases were infertile males whose partner had a normal infertility evaluation and controls were fertile males whose partner had a pregnancy within 2 years. Exposures were assessed by self-report questionnaires. Bivariate, stratified, and multivariable analyses were performed. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the influence of a potential unidentified confounder on the results. 650 infertile cases and 698 fertile controls were compared. In the final model, current alcohol consumption (OR=1.6, 95%CI 1.1–2.2), electric blanket use (OR=7.4, 95%CI 2.3–23.4) and waterbed use (OR=4.4, 95%CI 1.7–11.0) were associated with a greater likelihood of infertility. A protective effect on infertility was observed with video display terminals (OR=0.54, 95%CI 0.34–0.87), marijuana (OR=0.40, 95%CI 0.19–0.85), radiation (OR 0.50, 95%CI 0.26–0.97), work-related stress (OR=0.54, 95%CI 0.32–0.90), and surprisingly hot bath use (OR=0.49, 95%CI 0.28–0.85). No significant associations were noted between smoking, exercise, shift work, metal fumes, electric magnetic fields, space heaters, Jacuzzi, solvents, lead, paint, pesticides, vibration, coffee or tea and fertility. In the subgroup comparison of cases with male factor vs. unexplained infertility, alcohol consumption was 34% more likely to be related to unexplained infertility rather than male factor (OR=0.66, 95%CI 0.44–0.99) and video terminal use was 42% more likely to be associated with unexplained infertility (OR=0.58, 95%CI 0.37–0.91). Otherwise, exposures were not differentially associated with infertility type. Except for heat exposures consisting of waterbed and electric blanket use, environmental factors in men are weakly associated, if at all, with infertility in men. This study highlights many of the challenges involved in studying environmental exposures and fertility. Further large prospective studies are necessary to clarify the association between environmental exposures and infertility before widespread behavioral modification is recommended.

Electric Blanket Use and Breast Cancer

The authors respond: We thank Jason Robarge1 for his letter regarding our article.2 Although direct measurements of the electric blankets actually used by the participants might be of interest, such measurements do not necessarily provide a valid assessment of EMF exposure and were not feasible in our study for the reasons that follow. Because our study had a case-control study design and ascertained the past use of electric blankets, it is likely that participants used several blankets over their lifetime. Many of the older blankets would have been discarded and not available for measurements. Furthermore, most of the participants who used electric blankets were former users (77%); as such, their blankets would not have been in use during the study period. Even for current users, blanket measurements would not provide an indication of past exposure. Before 1989, there were 3 blanket manufacturers, and exposure levels produced by these earlier or conventional blankets were higher than in later years.3 Newer blankets were manufactured using the PTC (positive temperature coefficient) design, which allowed for cancellation of fields and much lower levels of magnetic fields emitted.4 Most participants who used electric blankets purchased their blankets before 1989 (88%). We found no association when stratifying by use of older blankets or newer blankets, although the number of participants who reported using the newer blankets was small. We interviewed participants during all 4 seasons of the year. Valid measurements of the electric blankets as they were actually used (eg, use when the window was open or closed) would be difficult. Our results are consistent with the findings of 8 previous studies of electric blankets and breast cancer. Erin S. O'Leary Department of Preventive Medicine School of Medicine Stony Brook University Stony Brook, NY 11794–8036 [email protected] Geoffrey C. Kabat Elinor R. Schoenfeld M. Cristina Leske Department of Preventive Medicine Stony Brook University Stony Brook, NY

Electric Blanket Use and Breast Cancer

Electric Blanket Use and Breast Cancer

Electric blanket use and breast cancer on Long Island.

Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) has been hypothesized to increase the risk of breast cancer by inhibiting the normal nocturnal rise in melatonin levels. Information on electric blanket use was collected in a large, 2-stage, population-based, case-control investigation of breast cancer, The Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project (LIBCSP) and the EMF and Breast Cancer on Long Island Study (EBCLIS). The LIBCSP used a comprehensive questionnaire, including questions about electric appliance use, with responses available on 1354 cases diagnosed between mid-1996 and mid-1997 and 1426 control subjects. EBCLIS enrolled 576 cases and 585 control subjects who had participated in the LIBCSP and who had lived in their current homes for at least 15 years. EBCLIS participants were interviewed to obtain additional information on EMF exposures, including detailed questions on electric blanket use. Analyses of both the EBCLIS and the LIBCSP groups showed no association with breast cancer for ever-use of electric blankets, current or former use, use directly on the body, or use throughout the night in either pre- or postmenopausal women (range of adjusted odds ratios for ever vs. never use: 0.9-1.2). Furthermore, there was no trend in risk with increased duration of use, frequency of use, or other indicators of more intense exposure to EMF. Electric blanket use was not associated with hormone receptor status of the tumor. The results of this large investigation are consistent with those of most previous studies, and do not support the hypothesis that electric blanket use is associated with increased breast cancer risk.

Endometrial cancer incidence in relation to electric blanket use.

Endometrial cancer is associated with endogenous and exogenous estrogen excess. Some investigators have posited that electromagnetic fields may influence cancer risk through estrogenic hormonal mechanisms; however, there have been no studies reporting on electric blanket exposure in relation to endometrial cancer. The authors examined this possible association between endometrial cancer risk and electric blanket or mattress cover use as part of a population-based, case-control study. This analysis included incident endometrial cancer cases 40-79 years of age, interviewed during 1994 (n = 148; response rate, 87%) and identified from the Wisconsin tumor registry. Female controls of similar age were randomly selected from population lists (n = 659; response rate, 85%). Information regarding electric blanket and mattress cover use and endometrial cancer risk factors was obtained through structured telephone interviews approximately 1 year after diagnosis. After adjustment for age, body mass index, and postmenopausal hormone use, the risk of endometrial cancer was similar among ever users (odds ratio = 1.04, 95% confidence interval: 0.70, 1.55) and among current users (odds ratio = 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.49, 1.54) as compared with never users. Despite its small size and potential misclassification of exposure, this study provides evidence against an association between electric blanket or mattress cover use and endometrial cancer.

Electric blanket or mattress cover use and breast cancer incidence in women 50-79 years of age.

Previous research has demonstrated inconsistent associations between electromagnetic radiation, especially from electric blanket use, and breast cancer. Breast cancer risk according to electric blanket or mattress cover use was examined as part of a multicenter population-based case-control study. Breast cancer patients 50-79 years of age (N = 1949) were identified from statewide tumor registries in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin from the period June 1994 to July 1995. Women of similar age were randomly selected from population lists as controls. Information regarding electric blanket and mattress cover use and breast cancer risk factors was obtained through telephone interviews. After adjustment for age, body mass index, and other breast cancer risk factors, the risk of breast cancer was similar among ever-users (relative risk = 0.93; 95% confidence interval = 0.82-1.06) and lower among current users than among never-users (relative risk = 0.79; 95% confidence interval = 0.66-0.95). There was no evidence of a dose-response relation with increasing number of months that electric blankets had been used. This study provides evidence against a positive association between electric blanket or mattress cover use and breast cancer.

Electric blanket use and breast cancer in the Nurses' Health Study.

Electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) have been hypothesized to increase the risk of breast cancer, and electric blankets represent an important source of exposure to EMFs. The authors examined the relation between electric blanket use and invasive breast cancer in the Nurses' Health Study. On the biennial questionnaire in 1992, 87,497 women provided information on this exposure during three consecutive time periods. In a prospective analysis with 301,775 person-years of follow-up through 1996 (954 cases), the relative risk for any electric blanket use was not elevated (relative risk (RR) = 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.95, 1.24) after controlling for breast cancer risk factors. There was a weak association between breast cancer and electric blanket use at least 16 years before diagnosis and long-term use in age-adjusted analyses but not in multivariate models. In a retrospective analysis of 1,318,683 person-years of follow-up (2,426 cases), the multivariate relative risk associated with use before disease follow-up began was null (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.16). Similar results were obtained in analyses stratified by menopause and restricted to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. While 95% confidence intervals for these estimates did not exclude small risks, overall, results did not support an association between breast cancer risk and exposure to EMFs from electric blankets.

Exposure to electromagnetic fields from use of electric blankets and other in-home electrical appliances and breast cancer risk.

Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from use of electric blankets and other in-home electrical appliances has been hypothesized to increase breast cancer risk. To test the hypothesis, the authors analyzed data from a case-control study of female breast cancer conducted in Connecticut in 1994-1997. A total of 608 incident breast cancer patients and 609 age frequency-matched controls, 31-85 years old, were interviewed by trained study interviewers using a standardized, structured questionnaire to obtain information on lifetime use of various in-home electrical appliances. A total of 40% of the cases and 43% of the controls reported regular use of electric blankets in their lifetime, which gave an adjusted odds ratio of 0.9 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.7, 1.1). For those who reported using electric blankets continuously throughout the night, the adjusted odds ratio was 0.9 (95% CI: 0.7, 1.2) when compared with never users. The risk did not vary according to age at first use, duration of use, or menopausal and estrogen receptor status. The authors also did not find an association between use of other major in-home electrical appliances and breast cancer risk. In conclusion, exposure to EMFs from in-home electrical appliance use was not found to increase breast cancer risk in this study.

Maternal periconceptional use of electric bed-heating devices and risk for neural tube defects and orofacial clefts.

Electric and magnetic fields are of concern as risk factors for adverse reproductive outcomes, including congenital anomalies. Among residential exposures to electric and magnetic fields, electric bed-heating devices such as electric blankets may be a substantial source of such exposures, and their use is fairly common. Two population-based case-control studies were analyzed to investigate whether the periconceptional use of electric blankets, bed warmers, or electrically heated waterbeds increased the risk of women to deliver infants or fetuses with neural tube defects (NTDs) or orofacial clefts. We obtained information on bed-heating devices from 538 NTD cases and their 539 controls in one study, and 265 NTD cases and 481 controls and 652 orofacial cleft cases and their 734 controls from another study. Our results revealed a few modestly elevated risks of certain anomaly phenotypes with maternal use of certain bed-heating devices, but risks tended to be imprecise. In general, women who reported more frequent use of a bed-heating device, or longer duration of use, did not appear to have a higher risk for delivering offspring with anomalies than were women who reported less frequent or shorter-duration use.

Exposure from Appliances

The dosemeter studies on exposures to ELF electromagnetic irradiation from domestic equipment all suggest the whole-body doses are low, whilst some exposure to extremities could be high but of brief duration. Old style electric overblankets, however, are an exception and produce high fields and relatively high whole-body doses if switched on during the night. Relatively few epidemiological studies have addressed these issues. All of the studies have associated problems of interpretations. Two isolated studies throw up on association with the frequency of spontaneous abortion and electric blanket use whilst another links adult AML and electric shaver usage. Both results could be fortuitous. More consistency appears from three studies of childhood leukaemia. Here statistically significant associations between electric blanket use in pregnancies appear in two separate studies, as does hair dryer use in the case of children: other appliances use associations have been reported. These results are critically assessed. The United Kingdom Childhood Cancer Study (UKCCS) addresses some of these issues as part of a wider ranging assessment of EMF at home and at school. External sources are incorporated with the measurement of domestic ambient conditions in an attempt to make an overall assessment of total exposure.

Prostate Cancer in Relation to the Use of Electric Blanket or Heated Water Bed

Using data from a case-control study conducted in Group Health Cooperative (GHC) of Puget Sound, we examined the relation between the use of electric blankets or heated water beds and the risk of prostate cancer. Cases were 175 prostate cancer patients ages 40-69 years. Controls were 258 male GHC members frequency matched to cases. The odds ratio (OR) for prostate cancer associated with the use of an electric blanket or heated water bed was 1.4 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9-2.2). The risk, however, did not tend to be higher with increasing months per year or years of use. This study did not provide clear evidence on the hypothesized association.

Electric blanket use and breast cancer risk among younger women.

To investigate whether use of electric blankets, one of the largest sources of electromagnetic field exposure in the home, is associated with the risk of female breast cancer, the authors analyzed data from a population-based US case-control study. The 2,199 case patients were under age 55 years and had been newly diagnosed with breast cancer between 1990 and 1992. The 2,009 controls were frequency-matched to cases by 5-year age group and geographic area. There was little or no risk associated with ever having used electric blankets, mattress pads, or heated water beds among women under age 45 years (adjusted odds ratio = 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.86-1.18) or among women aged > or =45 years (adjusted odds ratio = 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.87-1.43). There was no substantial variation in risk with duration of use; with whether the appliance was used only to warm the bed or used throughout the night; with menopausal status; or with the cases' hormone receptor status or stage of disease. Potential breast cancer risk factors that were associated with electric blanket use did not substantially confound the associations under investigation. These data do not support the hypothesis that electric blanket use increases breast cancer risk among women under age 55 years.

Association between Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia and Use of Electrical Appliances during Pregnancy and Childhood

As part of a comprehensive study of residential magnetic field exposure in nine midwestern and mid-Atlantic states, we evaluated the use of appliances by 640 patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, 0-14 years of age, diagnosed between 1989 and 1993, and 640 matched control children. Mothers were interviewed regarding use of electrical appliances during their pregnancy with the subject and the child's postnatal use. The risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia was elevated in children whose mothers reported use of an electric blanket or mattress pad during pregnancy [odds ratio (OR) = 1.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.11-2.29] but was reduced for use of sewing machines during pregnancy (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.59-0.98). The risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia was increased with children's use of electric blankets or mattress pads (OR = 2.75; 95% CI = 1.52-4.98) and three other electrical appliances (hair dryers, video machines in arcades, and video games connected to a television), but the patterns of risk for duration in years of use and frequency of use were inconsistent for most appliances used by children. Risks rose with increasing number of hours per day children spent watching television, but risks were similar regardless of the usual distance from the television. The inconsistency in the dose-response patterns for many appliances, reporting and selection bias, and the lack of an effect for measured 60 Hertz magnetic fields or wire codes in our companion study must be considered before ascribing these associations to exposures from magnetic fields.

Electromagnetic field exposures and childhood cancers in New Zealand.

To assess childhood cancer risks for electromagnetic field (EMF) exposures. A case-control study was conducted in New Zealand. Cases (aged from zero to 14 years) were ascertained from national databases including the New Zealand Cancer Registry; 303 took part (participation rate, 88 percent). The 303 age- and gender-matched controls were selected randomly from birth records (participation, 69 percent). Mothers were interviewed about appliance exposures (all cases and controls), and 24-hour residential measurements of EMFs were made (leukemia cases and matched controls). For the various appliance exposures, there were some odds ratios (OR) above 1.0 and others below 1.0. For electric blanket use by the child before diagnosis, the adjusted ORs were: leukemia, 2.2 (95 percent confidence interval [CI] = 0.7-6.4); central nervous system cancers, ORs = 1.6 (CI = 0.4-7.1); and other solid cancers, OR = 2.4 (CI = 1.0-6.1). Leukemia risk was increased for the highest category of the mean measured bedroom magnetic field (> or = 0.2microT cf < 0.1 microT), with an adjusted OR of 15.5 (CI = 1.1-224). A gradient in OR with exposure was not shown (middle category: OR 1.4, CI = 0.3-7.6), and there was no association with exposure categorized into thirds based on controls' exposure. The adjusted OR for leukemia in relation to the measured daytime room magnetic field (> or = 0.2 microT cf < 0.1 microT) was 5.2 (CI = 0.9-30.8). This was a small study and multiple comparisons were made. The positive findings thus should be interpreted cautiously.