Examination of the effects of a new compression garment on skin tissue oxygenation in healthy volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Compression devices have been shown to reduce venous stasis, increase blood flow and skin tissue oxygenation (StO2), promoting healthy tissue. This study aimed to explore the efficacy of a new compression garment in three different positions in healthy adults. Methods: In this quantitative study, potential participants were screened and recruited using the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q, Canada). Participants attended three separate, one-hour sessions to evaluate StO2 in supine-lying, chair-sitting and long-sitting positions. StO2 was recorded for 20 minutes pre-, during and post- a 20-minute intervention using a compression garment, TributeWrap (Lohmann-Rauscher, Germany). A repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was followed by post-hoc pairwise comparisons. Results: A total of 28 healthy volunteers took part (aged 24.6 ±8.4years; 13 males, 15 females). A significant difference was seen between the three positions (p<0.001). Chair-sitting had the lowest StO2 pre-intervention, increasing StO2 significantly (32.25%, p<0.001) during wear of the compression garment (24.8% higher than baseline post-intervention). No significant difference was seen between long sitting and supine-lying (p=1.000). In contrast, long-sitting and supine-lying StO2 was higher pre-intervention compared with chair-sitting and only increased post-intervention (11% and 16.8% respectively, p<0.001) compared with baseline. Conclusion: The compression garment significantly increased StO2 levels in both seating positions. Further studies are required to determine if increasing StO2 through short intervention sessions with this device has the potential to improve self-management of tissue health in individuals with reduced mobility, oedema or venous insufficiency.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".