OBJECTIVE: intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) of the foot (IPC(foot)), calf (IPC(calf)) or both (IPC(foot+calf)) augments calf inflow, and improves the walking ability and peripheral haemodynamics of claudicants (IPC(foot), IPC(foot+calf)), largely due to venous outflow enhancement. This cohort study, using direct pressure measurements in healthy limbs, determines the optimal combination of frequency (2-4 impulses/minute), applied pressure (60-140 mmHg), mode (IPC(foot)-IPC(calf)-IPC(foot+calf)) and delay time of calf-to-foot impulse (0 s-0.5 s-1 s) that enables IPC to generate an almost complete and sustained decrease in venous pressure. RESULTS: (a) IPC(foot)at 120 and 80 mmHg generated lower venous pressure than that with 100 and 60 mmHg (p=0.036) respectively, for 2-4 impulses/minute; venous pressure differences between applied pressures of 140 and 120 mmHg or between 80 and 100 mmHg were insignificant. (b) Venous pressure with IPC(calf)at 80 mmHg was lower than that with 60 mmHg (p=0.036) (2-4 cycles/minute); differences in venous pressure between applied pressures of 140 and 100 mmHg or between 120 and 80 mmHg were insignificant. (c) At applied pressures 60-140 mmHg, IPC(foot+calf)with one-second delay generated lower venous pressure than that with half-second delay (p=0.036), the latter being more efficient than zero delay; increasing applied pressures produced lower venous pressure, but differences were small. Venous pressure decreased with increasing IPC frequency (from 2 to 3-4/minute), at applied pressures 60-140 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: IPC(foot+calf)at applied 120-140 mmHg, a frequency of 3-4 impulses/minute and one-second delay, provided the optimum intermittent pneumatic stimulus. Copyright 2000 Harcourt Publishers Ltd.
OBJECTIVE: intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) of the foot (IPC(foot)), calf (IPC(calf)) or both (IPC(foot+calf)) augments calf inflow, and improves the walking ability and peripheral haemodynamics of claudicants (IPC(foot), IPC(foot+calf)), largely due to venous outflow enhancement. This cohort study, using direct pressure measurements in healthy limbs, determines the optimal combination of frequency (2-4 impulses/minute), applied pressure (60-140 mmHg), mode (IPC(foot)-IPC(calf)-IPC(foot+calf)) and delay time of calf-to-foot impulse (0 s-0.5 s-1 s) that enables IPC to generate an almost complete and sustained decrease in venous pressure. RESULTS: (a) IPC(foot)at 120 and 80 mmHg generated lower venous pressure than that with 100 and 60 mmHg (p=0.036) respectively, for 2-4 impulses/minute; venous pressure differences between applied pressures of 140 and 120 mmHg or between 80 and 100 mmHg were insignificant. (b) Venous pressure with IPC(calf)at 80 mmHg was lower than that with 60 mmHg (p=0.036) (2-4 cycles/minute); differences in venous pressure between applied pressures of 140 and 100 mmHg or between 120 and 80 mmHg were insignificant. (c) At applied pressures 60-140 mmHg, IPC(foot+calf)with one-second delay generated lower venous pressure than that with half-second delay (p=0.036), the latter being more efficient than zero delay; increasing applied pressures produced lower venous pressure, but differences were small. Venous pressure decreased with increasing IPC frequency (from 2 to 3-4/minute), at applied pressures 60-140 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: IPC(foot+calf)at applied 120-140 mmHg, a frequency of 3-4 impulses/minute and one-second delay, provided the optimum intermittent pneumatic stimulus. Copyright 2000 Harcourt Publishers Ltd.
Authors: Ryan D Sheldon; Bruno T Roseguini; John P Thyfault; Brett D Crist; M H Laughlin; Sean C Newcomer Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2012-03-22
Authors: Bruno T Roseguini; Arturo A Arce-Esquivel; Sean C Newcomer; M H Laughlin Journal: Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol Date: 2011-09-28 Impact factor: 3.619
Authors: Jennifer Book; Chekema N Prince; Rodrigo Villar; Richard L Hughson; Sean D Peterson Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2016-01-25 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Bruno T Roseguini; S Mehmet Soylu; Jeffrey J Whyte; H T Yang; Sean Newcomer; M Harold Laughlin Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2010-03-26 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Mochamat Helmi; Rob B P de Wilde; Jos R C Jansen; Bart F Geerts; Michel I M Versteegh; Paul C M van den Berg; Diederik Gommers; A B Johan Groeneveld Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2012-11-10 Impact factor: 2.502