The impact of healthy motion seating on lower‐limb blood flow and blood pressure response to simulated long‐haul air travel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prolonged sitting inherent to long-haul air travel can acutely decrease lower-limb blood flow and increase brachial blood pressure. Healthy motion seating (HMS), which passively alters sitting interface pressure and posture, is a promising technology which may attenuate the deleterious effects of long-haul air travel. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of an innovative airplane passenger seat motion feature, aerospace HMS, on lower-limb blood flow and blood pressure in response to 6.5 h of simulated long-haul air travel. In a randomised cross-over design, 19 healthy adults completed a 6.5 h long-haul flight simulation in aerospace seating equipped with (HMS) and without (CON) healthy motion technology. Superficial femoral artery blood flow, brachial blood pressure, and perceptions of mood disturbance, pain and discomfort were measured before and after flight simulation. In linear mixed models there was a significant interaction (condition × time) effect for superficial femoral artery blood flow, with a decrease in lower-limb blood flow in CON (-22.4 mL/min; 95% CI: -2.41, -42.39; P = 0.032) but not HMS (3.7 mL/min; 95% CI: -16.3, 23.67; P = 0.720) across the 6.5 h flight simulation. There were no interaction, group nor time effects for blood pressure. Mood, pain and discomfort all worsened across the 6.5 h flight simulation (time, all P < 0.05), but there were no interaction nor group effects. The passive alterations in sitting interface pressure, posture and movement created by aerospace HMS can prevent prolonged sitting-induced reductions in local lower-limb blood flow typical of long-haul air travel.
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".