English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Non-invasive monitoring of respiratory muscle function is an area of increasing research interest, resulting in the appearance of new monitoring devices, one of these being piezoelectric contact sensors. The present study was designed to test whether the use of piezoelectric contact (non-invasive) sensors could be useful in respiratory monitoring, in particular in measuring the timing of diaphragmatic contraction.    Methods  Experiments were performed in an animal model: three pentobarbital anesthetized mongrel dogs. The motion of the thoracic cage was acquired by means of a piezoelectric contact sensor placed on the costal wall. This signal is compared with direct measurements of the diaphragmatic muscle length, made by sonomicrometry. Furthermore, to assess the diaphragmatic function other respiratory signals were acquired: respiratory airflow and transdiaphragmatic pressure. Diaphragm contraction time was estimated with these four signals. Using diaphragm length signal as reference, contraction times estimated with the other three signals were compared with the contraction time estimated with diaphragm length signal.    Results  The contraction time estimated with the TM signal tends to give a reading 0.06 seconds lower than the measure made with the DL signal (-0.21 and 0.00 for FL and DP signals, respectively), with a standard deviation of 0.05 seconds (0.08 and 0.06 for FL and DP signals, respectively). Correlation coefficients indicated a close link between time contraction estimated with TM signal and contraction time estimated with DL signal (a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.98, a reliability coefficient of 0.95, a slope of 1.01 and a Spearman's rank-order coefficient of 0.98). In general, correlation coefficients and mean and standard deviation of the difference were better in the inspiratory load respiratory test than in spontaneous ventilation tests.    Conclusion  The technique presented in this work provides a non-invasive method to assess the timing of diaphragmatic contraction in canines, using a piezoelectric contact sensor placed on the costal wall.

Non-Invasive monitoring of diaphragmatic timing by means of surface contact sensors: An experimental study in dogs