Examination of a new mobile intermittent pneumatic compression device in healthy adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) is an alternative method of compression treatment designed to compress the leg and mimic ambulatory pump action to actively promote venous return. This study explores the efficacy of a new portable IPC device on tissue oxygenation (StO 2 ) in two sitting positions. Method: In this quantitative, healthy single cohort study, participants were screened and recruited using Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q, Canada). Participants attended two separate one-hour sessions to evaluate StO 2 in an upright chair-sitting position and in a long-sitting position. StO 2 was recorded for 20 minutes before, during and after a 20-minute intervention of the IPC device (Venapro, DJO Global, US). Results: A total of 29 healthy volunteers took part in the study. A significant difference was seen between the two seating positions (p=0.003) with long-sitting showing a 12% higher StO 2 level than chair-sitting post-intervention. A similar effect was seen in both sitting positions when analysing data over three timepoints (p=0.000). Post-hoc pairwise comparisons showed that significant improvements in StO 2 (p≤0.000) were seen from baseline, throughout the intervention, continuing up to 15 minutes post-intervention, indicating a continued effect of the device after a short intervention. Conclusion: Increasing StO 2 through short intervention sessions with this portable device has potential for use within various health and sports-based practices, improving tissue health, potentially reducing postoperative deep vein thrombosis (DVT) risk or inflammation. Such devices lend themselves to wide self-management implementation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".