Search Results

You are looking at 11 - 16 of 16 items for

  • Author: Kenneth L. Knight x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Interferential Current Therapy: Often Used but Misunderstood

David O. Draper and Kenneth L. Knight

Column-editor : David O. Draper

Restricted access

Mild Frostbite Caused by Gel Pack Application

David Draper and Kenneth L. Knight

Edited by Joe J. Piccininni

Restricted access

Muscle Injury Management with Cryotherapy

Kenneth L. Knight, Jody B. Brucker, Paul D. Stoneman, and Mack D. Rubley

Restricted access

Hot-Pack Warming in 4- and 8-Pack Hydrocollator® Units

David A. Kaiser, Kenneth L. Knight, Jeremy M. Huff, Lisa S. Jutte, and Preston Carlson

Objective:

To determine the time needed to heat hot packs to water temperature (73–75 °C) in 4- and 8-pack Hydrocollator® units.

Design and Setting:

A 2 × 2 factorial design, with heating unit (4- or 8-pack) and number of packs added (1 or 3/7) as independent variables. Dependent variables were hot-pack and Hydrocollator-water temperatures.

Measurements:

Temperatures were measured with type T thermocouples interfaced with a 16-channel Isothermex™. Hydrocollator temperatures were measured with 2 thermocouples, and hot-pack temperatures, with 6 thermocouples inserted in 6 cells of a hydrated, 10- by 12-in Hydrocollator pack. Temperature was measured every 30 s for 5 min before and 45 min after pack immersion.

Results:

Packs warmed rapidly from ~18 to 65–68 °C by 10 min and to 72.5–75 °C by 20 min. Heating slowed by ~5% when 7 packs were added to the large unit. Water temperatures decreased ~2 °C (from ~75 °C) after 7 packs were immersed and returned to preimmersion temperatures by 20 min.

Conclusions:

Rewarming is quicker than commonly believed (20–150 min) and might be a function of the number of packs being simultaneously warmed.

Restricted access

Contrast-Bath Therapy and Sensation Over the Anterior Talofibular Ligament

Billy E. Cotts, Kenneth L. Knight, J. William Myrer, and Shane S. Schulthies

Context:

It has been suggested that contrast-bath therapy alters sensation and enables patients to return to exercise more quickly.

Objective:

To determine whether contrast-bath therapy alters sensation of pressure in the ankle.

Design:

A 2 × 4 × 4 factorial design with repeated measures on 2 factors. Independent variables included gender, time (preapplication and 1, 6, and 11 min postapplication), and treatment (control, cold bath, hot bath, and contrast bath).

Setting:

Laboratory.

Participants:

12 men and 12 women, college track athletes actively engaged in preseason workouts 5-6 days/wk.

Interventions:

Sensation of pressure was tested preapplication and 1, 6, and 11 min postapplication. Each treatment lasted 20 min.

Main Outcome Measure:

Sensation of pressure at baseline and 1, 6, and 11 min postapplication over the anterior talofibular ligament of the right ankle.

Results:

There was no difference between genders. Sensation of pressure was greater for the heat condition than the other 3 conditions at 1 and 6 min postapplication. During the heating condition, sensation of pressure was greater at 1 and 6 min postapplication than during preapplication. During the contrast condition, sensation of pressure was less at 6 min postapplication than during preapplication.

Conclusion:

Contrast- and cold-bath therapy (at 13 °C) do not affect numbness.

Restricted access

High-Volt Pulsed Current: Treatment of Skin Wounds and Musculoskeletal Injuries

David O. Draper, Kenneth L. Knight, and Justin H. Rigby

Edited by Lindsey E. Eberman