Effect of subsurface pressure on the interface pressure measurement in an in vitro experiment

Yung-wei Chi, Ray Lin, Kuo Hao Tseng, Blythe Durbin-Johnson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: It was hypothesized that subsurface pressure (mimicking subcutaneous pressure) variation may affect interface pressure measurement. Method: BISCO® (Rogers, CT) foam was placed on a cylinder cuff model for the experiment. Picopress® and a piezoresistive sensor were used for interface pressure measurement. External pressure was applied using an automated pressure cuff at 40 mmHg. Subsurface pressure mimicking subcutaneous pressure from 3 mmHg to 12 mmHg was generated by a pressure pump underneath the foam. Interface pressure was compared between the true pressure, 40 mmHg, versus Picopress® and the piezoresistive sensor using linear mixed effect model (SAS software, version 9.4, SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Result: Interface pressure measurement using Picopress® did not differ between the incremental subsurface pressures (mean 45.4 ± 0.4) (P = 0.54), in contrast to piezoresistive sensor, which demonstrated a difference (mean 42.65 ± 2.7) (P < 0.001). This difference appeared to be linearly related. Conclusion: Subsurface pressure mimicking subcutaneous pressure may affect the overall interface pressure measurement according to the piezoresistive sensor but not Picopress®.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPhlebology
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Pressure
In Vitro Techniques
Software

Keywords

  • compression therapy
  • Interface pressure
  • manometry sensor
  • piezoresistive sensor
  • subcutaneous pressure
  • subsurface pressure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Effect of subsurface pressure on the interface pressure measurement in an in vitro experiment. / Chi, Yung-wei; Lin, Ray; Tseng, Kuo Hao; Durbin-Johnson, Blythe.

In: Phlebology, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{fd8e79c5d1cf49b69ab013fa31e8cec7,
title = "Effect of subsurface pressure on the interface pressure measurement in an in vitro experiment",
abstract = "Introduction: It was hypothesized that subsurface pressure (mimicking subcutaneous pressure) variation may affect interface pressure measurement. Method: BISCO{\circledR} (Rogers, CT) foam was placed on a cylinder cuff model for the experiment. Picopress{\circledR} and a piezoresistive sensor were used for interface pressure measurement. External pressure was applied using an automated pressure cuff at 40 mmHg. Subsurface pressure mimicking subcutaneous pressure from 3 mmHg to 12 mmHg was generated by a pressure pump underneath the foam. Interface pressure was compared between the true pressure, 40 mmHg, versus Picopress{\circledR} and the piezoresistive sensor using linear mixed effect model (SAS software, version 9.4, SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Result: Interface pressure measurement using Picopress{\circledR} did not differ between the incremental subsurface pressures (mean 45.4 ± 0.4) (P = 0.54), in contrast to piezoresistive sensor, which demonstrated a difference (mean 42.65 ± 2.7) (P < 0.001). This difference appeared to be linearly related. Conclusion: Subsurface pressure mimicking subcutaneous pressure may affect the overall interface pressure measurement according to the piezoresistive sensor but not Picopress{\circledR}.",
keywords = "compression therapy, Interface pressure, manometry sensor, piezoresistive sensor, subcutaneous pressure, subsurface pressure",
author = "Yung-wei Chi and Ray Lin and Tseng, {Kuo Hao} and Blythe Durbin-Johnson",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0268355519857627",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Phlebology",
issn = "1433-3031",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of subsurface pressure on the interface pressure measurement in an in vitro experiment

AU - Chi, Yung-wei

AU - Lin, Ray

AU - Tseng, Kuo Hao

AU - Durbin-Johnson, Blythe

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Introduction: It was hypothesized that subsurface pressure (mimicking subcutaneous pressure) variation may affect interface pressure measurement. Method: BISCO® (Rogers, CT) foam was placed on a cylinder cuff model for the experiment. Picopress® and a piezoresistive sensor were used for interface pressure measurement. External pressure was applied using an automated pressure cuff at 40 mmHg. Subsurface pressure mimicking subcutaneous pressure from 3 mmHg to 12 mmHg was generated by a pressure pump underneath the foam. Interface pressure was compared between the true pressure, 40 mmHg, versus Picopress® and the piezoresistive sensor using linear mixed effect model (SAS software, version 9.4, SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Result: Interface pressure measurement using Picopress® did not differ between the incremental subsurface pressures (mean 45.4 ± 0.4) (P = 0.54), in contrast to piezoresistive sensor, which demonstrated a difference (mean 42.65 ± 2.7) (P < 0.001). This difference appeared to be linearly related. Conclusion: Subsurface pressure mimicking subcutaneous pressure may affect the overall interface pressure measurement according to the piezoresistive sensor but not Picopress®.

AB - Introduction: It was hypothesized that subsurface pressure (mimicking subcutaneous pressure) variation may affect interface pressure measurement. Method: BISCO® (Rogers, CT) foam was placed on a cylinder cuff model for the experiment. Picopress® and a piezoresistive sensor were used for interface pressure measurement. External pressure was applied using an automated pressure cuff at 40 mmHg. Subsurface pressure mimicking subcutaneous pressure from 3 mmHg to 12 mmHg was generated by a pressure pump underneath the foam. Interface pressure was compared between the true pressure, 40 mmHg, versus Picopress® and the piezoresistive sensor using linear mixed effect model (SAS software, version 9.4, SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Result: Interface pressure measurement using Picopress® did not differ between the incremental subsurface pressures (mean 45.4 ± 0.4) (P = 0.54), in contrast to piezoresistive sensor, which demonstrated a difference (mean 42.65 ± 2.7) (P < 0.001). This difference appeared to be linearly related. Conclusion: Subsurface pressure mimicking subcutaneous pressure may affect the overall interface pressure measurement according to the piezoresistive sensor but not Picopress®.

KW - compression therapy

KW - Interface pressure

KW - manometry sensor

KW - piezoresistive sensor

KW - subcutaneous pressure

KW - subsurface pressure

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068336578&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068336578&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0268355519857627

DO - 10.1177/0268355519857627

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85068336578

JO - Phlebology

JF - Phlebology

SN - 1433-3031

ER -