Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 14 items for :

  • "thermocouple" x
Clear All
Restricted access

Lisa S. Jutte, Kenneth L. Knight and Blaine C. Long

Objective:

Examine thermocouple model uncertainty (reliability + validity).

Design:

First, a 3 × 3 repeated measures design with independent variables electrothermometers and thermocouple model. Second, a 1 × 3 repeated measures design with independent variable subprobe.

Intervention:

Three electrothermometers, 3 thermocouple models, a multi-sensor probe and a mercury thermometer measured a stable water bath.

Main Outcome Measures:

Temperature and absolute temperature differences between thermocouples and a mercury thermometer.

Results:

Thermocouple uncertainty was greater than manufactures’ claims. For all thermocouple models, validity and reliability were better in the Iso-Themex than the Datalogger, but there were no practical differences between models within an electrothermometers. Validity of multi-sensor probes and thermocouples within a probe were not different but were greater than manufacturers’ claims. Reliability of multiprobes and thermocouples within a probe were within manufacturers claims.

Conclusion:

Thermocouple models vary in reliability and validity. Scientists should test and report the uncertainty of their equipment rather than depending on manufactures’ claims.

Restricted access

Katie J. Lyman, Michael McCrone, Thomas A. Hanson, Christopher D. Mellinger and Kara Gange

surface temperature can be a poor proxy for intramuscular temperature during cryotherapy. 24 A better technique is to place the thermocouples at similar depths below the adipose layer to measure the effect on intramuscular temperature, rather than using skin surface temperature as a proxy for cryotherapy

Restricted access

Jamie Leonard, Mark Merrick, Chris Ingersoll and Mitchell Cordova

Context:

Research on therapeutic ultrasound has not focused on the duration needed to cause thermal change with various ultrasound intensities.

Objective:

To analyze triceps surae intramuscular temperature using 4 intensity levels after a 10-min 1-MHz continuous ultrasound treatment at a depth of 4 cm.

Design:

1 × 4 repeated measures. Independent variable: intensity of 4 levels—0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 W/cm2. Dependent variable: peak intramuscular temperature.

Setting:

Research laboratory.

Participants:

19 volunteers with no lower leg pathologies.

Intervention:

Treatment order was balanced via Latin square and performed 24 hr apart.

Main Outcome Measures:

Peak intramuscular temperatures.

Results:

The only significant difference detected was that the mean temperature after the 1.0-W/cm2 treatment (37.3 °C) was greater than that at 2.0-W/cm2 intensity (36.1 °C). No treatment reached the desired 4° increase needed for therapeutic efficacy.

Conclusions:

Treatments at 1.0 W/cm2 increased tissue temperatures more than those at 2.0 W/cm2.

Restricted access

Jennifer Ostrowski, Angelina Purchio, Maria Beck and JoLynn Leisinger

as stance leg when kicking a soccer ball) was identified as the treatment leg. The area of largest girth was measured for the location of thermocouple insertion. The thickness of subcutaneous adipose tissue was measured via musculoskeletal ultrasound (GE LOGIQ e, Wauwatosa, WI) using a 12L linear

Restricted access

Jennifer Ostrowski, Angelina Purchio, Maria Beck, JoLynn Leisinger, Mackenzie Tucker and Sarah Hurst

largest girth was measured for the location of thermocouple insertion. The amount of subcutaneous adipose tissue was measured via musculoskeletal ultrasound (GE Logiq e, Wauwatosa, WI) and was recorded on the data collection sheet; 2 cm was added to the amount of adipose tissue, and this number was

Restricted access

Kara N. Gange, Michael C. Kjellerson and Christiane J. Berdan

thermocouple insertion area with diagnostic ultrasound; any contraindications to therapeutic ultrasound such as decreased blood flow, decreased sensation, blood clots or tumors, infections in the calf, or a fracture to the lower leg; any rashes or skin infections over the treatment area or thermocouple

Restricted access

Jennifer Ostrowski, C. Collin Herb, James Scifers, Teraka Gonzalez, Amada Jennings and Danvirg Breton

the participant’s nondominant calf. The Solaris 705 Plus with TSP attachment (Dynatronics Corporation) was utilized for the TSP condition. Pilot testing of TSP surface temperatures with and without the electrical stimulation component was performed using a surface thermocouple (SST-1; Physitemp

Restricted access

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

Daniel Krasinski, Ashley B. Thrasher, Michael G. Miller and William R. Holcomb

Context:

A potential variable that could affect rate of temperature elevation with ultrasound is the pressure (mass) that is applied to the transducer head during application. Added pressure could compress the tissue, affecting density and the transmission of ultrasound energy. Little research has been completed to determine the effects of the amount of pressure applied during therapeutic ultrasound in vivo.

Objective:

To determine the effects of different applied transducer mass on intramuscular temperature during an ultrasound treatment within the left triceps surae.

Design:

Crossover clinical trial.

Setting:

Human performance research laboratory.

Participants:

Convenience sample of thirteen healthy, college-age students.

Interventions:

Three separate MHz, 1.0-W/cm2 ultrasound treatments were administered 1.5 cm within the triceps surae. The independent variables were the linear temperature standards (0.5°C, 1.0°C, 1.5°C, and 2.0°C above baseline) and the 3 different applied pressures measured in grams (200 g, 600 g, and 800 g).

Main Outcome Measures:

A thermocouple probe was used to measure triceps surae temperature, and time to reach the temperature standards was recorded during the ultrasound treatments. A 4 × 3 repeated-measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) was used to analyze the differences for temperature points (0.5°C, 1.0°C, 1.5°C, and 2.0°C) and transducer mass (200 g, 600 g, and 800 g) and with respect to time.

Results:

The results of the RM-ANOVA showed no temperature-point and transducer-mass interaction (F 6,72 = 1.69, P = .137) or main effect for mass (F 2,24 = 1.23, P = .309). The time required to raise temperature 2°C was 209.1 ± 68.10 s at 200 g, 181.5 ± 61.50 s at 600 g, and 194.9 ± 75.54 s at 800 g.

Conclusions:

Under the conditions of this study, the amount of mass applied with the transducer during an ultrasound treatment does not ultimately affect the rate of tissue heating.

Restricted access

Cordial M. Gillette and Mark A. Merrick

-wire thermocouple temperature sensors. Temperature sensors were calibrated at 0° and 30° with an H-B instrument traceable to National Institute of Standards and Technology partial immersion thermometer. Intramuscular temperatures were recorded with 23-gauge, type T thermocouples (IT-23; Physitemp Instruments Inc