Effects of cycle periods and pressure amplitudes of alternating pressure on sacral skin blood flow responses
Effects of cycle periods and pressure amplitudes of alternating pressure on sacral skin blood flow responses
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jtv.2020.09.004
复制
发表时间：
2020-11-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Jan, Yih-Kuen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wu, Fu-Lien;Zheng, Zhi;Jan, Yih-Kuen
目的：比较不同周期和不同压力幅值的AP对正常人骶部SBF反应的影响，以确定该方案的有效性和安全性。方法：两项研究包括周期研究(82.5-min方案)和压力幅度研究(75/5vs65/15 mm Hg方案)。用激光多普勒血流仪(LDF)测定了20例受试者的骶骨SBF。AP载荷通过刚性LDF探头使用压痕随机施加。每个方案包括10分钟基线、20分钟AP和10分钟恢复期。提供了30分钟的洗涤期。结果：在低压期和高压期，45分钟循环方案较8 2.5分钟方案部分恢复了更多的SBF(0.87+/-0.04比0.71+/-0.03，p<；0.05)。在压力幅度研究中，75/5 mm Hg方案在低压期比65/15 mm Hg方案部分恢复了更多的骶骨SBF(0.87+/-0.1 vs0.25+/-0.03，p<；在高压期(0.23+/-0.02比0.21+/-0.02，无统计学意义)。结论：1)5min的周期优于2.5min，2)75/5 mm Hg的压力幅度优于65/15 mm Hg。这一发现为选择增加SBF的AP配置提供了见解。
Background: There are no guidelines on selecting alternating pressure (AP) configurations on increasing sacral skin blood flow (SBF).Aim: The specific aims were to compare different cycle periods and pressure amplitudes of AP on sacral SBF responses in healthy people to establish the efficacy and safety of the protocols.Methods: Two studies were tested, including the cycle period study (8 2.5-min vs 4 5-min protocols) and the pressure amplitude study (75/5 vs 65/15 mmHg protocols). Sacral SBF was measured using laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF) in 20 participants. AP loads were randomly applied using an indenter through the rigid LDF probe. Each protocol included a 10-min baseline, 20-min AP and 10-min recovery periods. A 30-min washout period was provided. The SBF response was normalized to the baseline SBF of each condition of each participant.Results: For the cycle period study, the 4 5-min cycle protocol partially restored more SBF than the 8 2.5-min cycle protocol at the low-pressure phase (0.87 +/- 0.04 vs 0.71 +/- 0.03, p < 0.05) and at the high-pressure phase (0.25 +/- 0.03 vs 0.19 +/- 0.03, p < 0.05). For the pressure amplitude study, the 75/5 mmHg protocol partially restored more sacral SBF than the 65/15 mmHg protocol at the low-pressure phase (0.87 +/- 0.1 vs 0.25 +/- 0.03, p < 0.05) but not at the high-pressure phase (0.23 +/- 0.02 vs 0.21 +/- 0.02, non-significant).Conclusion: This study demonstrated that 1) a cycle period of 5 min was better than 2.5 min and 2) a pressure amplitude of 75/5 mmHg was better than 65/15 mmHg. The finding provides insights for selecting the AP configurations for increasing SBF.