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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to analyze the change in interface pressure redistribution of three different types of cushions sat on by individuals in their 20s and older than 60 years old. [Subjects and Methods] One hundred and eleven college students and 100 persons than 60 years old were recruited. Sitting pressure redistribution was measured while subjects sat without cushions or on honeycomb, air, and memory foam cushions in that order. Subsequently, the cushion preference was measured. After obtaining all measurements, the mean total pressure and each quadrant's mean and peak pressure were analyzed. [Results] The mean hip and the peak pressures were low in the group of females aged 60 years or older, and the highest in the group of males in their 20s. The hip pressure ratio was low in the groups of females in their 20s and 60 years or older, whereas the thigh pressure ratio was high in the same groups. The analysis of cushion preference showed that the groups of males (42.0%) and females (40.0%) in their 20s mostly preferred air cushion. The men (55.1%) and women (50.0%) aged 20 years or older selected honeycomb and air cushions as the first and third preferred cushions with a high response rate. [Conclusion] Our results indicate that gender and age should be considered when recommending appropriate pressure redistribution cushions.

Comparing the interface pressure redistribution of three different types of cushions: differences according to age groups and cushion preferences