N Pittar1, T Winter2, L Falland-Cheung2, D Tong2, J N Waddell2. 1. Sir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, 310 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand. Electronic address: nickpittar@gmail.com. 2. Sir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, 310 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the hardness of the human scalp in vivo in order to identify an appropriate scalp simulant, from a range of commercially available silicone materials, for force impact assessment. Site-dependent variation in scalp hardness, and the applicability of contemporary skin simulants to the scalp were also considered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Shore A-type durometer was used to collected hardness data from the scalps of 30 human participants (five males and five females in each of the three age categories: 18-30, 31-40, 41-50) and four commercially available silicones (light, medium, and heavy-bodied PVS, and duplication silicone). One-sample t-tests were used to compare the mean hardness of simulants to that of the scalp. Site-dependent variation in the hardness of the scalp was assessed using a mixed-model repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Mean human scalp hardness derived from participants was 20.6 Durometer Units (DU; SD = 3.4). Analysis revealed only the medium-bodied PVS to be an acceptable scalp simulant when compared to the mean hardness of the human scalp (p = 0.869). Scalp hardness varied significantly anteroposteriorly (with an observable linear trend, p < 0.001), but not mediolaterally (p = 0.271). Comparisons of simulants to site-specific variation in scalp hardness anteroposteriorly found the medium-bodied PVS to be only suitable in the central region of the scalp (p = 0.391). In contrast, the duplication silicone (p = 0.074) and light-bodied PVS (p = 0.147) were only comparable to the posterior region. CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary skin simulants fail to accurately represent the scalp in terms of hardness. There is strong support for the use of medium-bodied PVS as a scalp simulant. Human scalp hardness varies significantly anteroposteriorly, but not mediolaterally, corresponding to regional anatomical variation within the scalp. A number of materials were identified as potential simulants for different regions of the scalp when more site-specific simulant research is required.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the hardness of the human scalp in vivo in order to identify an appropriate scalp simulant, from a range of commercially available silicone materials, for force impact assessment. Site-dependent variation in scalp hardness, and the applicability of contemporary skin simulants to the scalp were also considered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Shore A-type durometer was used to collected hardness data from the scalps of 30 humanparticipants (five males and five females in each of the three age categories: 18-30, 31-40, 41-50) and four commercially available silicones (light, medium, and heavy-bodied PVS, and duplication silicone). One-sample t-tests were used to compare the mean hardness of simulants to that of the scalp. Site-dependent variation in the hardness of the scalp was assessed using a mixed-model repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Mean humanscalp hardness derived from participants was 20.6 Durometer Units (DU; SD = 3.4). Analysis revealed only the medium-bodied PVS to be an acceptable scalp simulant when compared to the mean hardness of the human scalp (p = 0.869). Scalp hardness varied significantly anteroposteriorly (with an observable linear trend, p < 0.001), but not mediolaterally (p = 0.271). Comparisons of simulants to site-specific variation in scalp hardness anteroposteriorly found the medium-bodied PVS to be only suitable in the central region of the scalp (p = 0.391). In contrast, the duplication silicone (p = 0.074) and light-bodied PVS (p = 0.147) were only comparable to the posterior region. CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary skin simulants fail to accurately represent the scalp in terms of hardness. There is strong support for the use of medium-bodied PVS as a scalp simulant. Humanscalp hardness varies significantly anteroposteriorly, but not mediolaterally, corresponding to regional anatomical variation within the scalp. A number of materials were identified as potential simulants for different regions of the scalp when more site-specific simulant research is required.
Authors: Ka Po Maggie Tang; Kit Lun Yick; Pui Ling Li; Joanne Yip; King Hei Or; Kam Hong Chau Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 3.576
Authors: Nishaki Kiran Mehta; Katerina Morgaenko; David Haines; Edward Rojas-Pena; Brittney Heard; Rohit Malhotra; Andrew Darby; James Michael Mangrum; Pamela Mason; Christopher Campbell; Kenneth Bilchick Journal: J Arrhythm Date: 2021-01-19