Neurourology and urodynamics · 2021
Design and validation of an automated dual-arm instrumented intravaginal dynamometer.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Czyrnyj Catriona S, Bérubé Marie-Ève, Lanteigne Eric, Brennan Ana, Bader Yousef, Lomovtsev Dmitry, Vandermolen Megan, Boucher Samantha, Mitri Layla, McLean Linda
Аннотация
AIMS: (1) To present the design of a novel intravaginal dynamometer (IVD) capable of measuring vaginal closure force on both the anterior and posterior arms, (2) to use bench testing to validate the force, speed of arm opening, and positional accuracy of load measurement along the IVD arms, and (3) to present in vivo force measurements made with this device, comparing forces measured by the anterior and posterior arms.
METHODS: IVD load measurements were validated against an Instron® Universal Tester, arm opening speeds were validated using video analysis, and position-load accuracy was validated against calibration weights. In vivo IVD data were acquired from female volunteers during passive opening and pelvic floor muscle contraction tasks. Anterior and posterior IVD arm force outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: Forces measured by the IVD and Instron® exhibited a strong linear relationship with excellent model fit. The speed control system was valid when tested under physiological loading conditions, however smaller antero-posterior opening diameters (25 and 30 mm) exhibited some error. The loading position along the IVD arms had no effect on force outcomes. In vivo data exhibited differences between force outcomes measured at the anterior and posterior aspects of the vagina during active contraction and passive elongation of the pelvic floor muscles.
CONCLUSIONS: This IVD design demonstrates valid load measurement and speed control during bench testing. Active and passive forces measured are consistent with the literature. With dual instrumented arms, this device allows for further investigation into the source of measured vaginal closure forces.
METHODS: IVD load measurements were validated against an Instron® Universal Tester, arm opening speeds were validated using video analysis, and position-load accuracy was validated against calibration weights. In vivo IVD data were acquired from female volunteers during passive opening and pelvic floor muscle contraction tasks. Anterior and posterior IVD arm force outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: Forces measured by the IVD and Instron® exhibited a strong linear relationship with excellent model fit. The speed control system was valid when tested under physiological loading conditions, however smaller antero-posterior opening diameters (25 and 30 mm) exhibited some error. The loading position along the IVD arms had no effect on force outcomes. In vivo data exhibited differences between force outcomes measured at the anterior and posterior aspects of the vagina during active contraction and passive elongation of the pelvic floor muscles.
CONCLUSIONS: This IVD design demonstrates valid load measurement and speed control during bench testing. Active and passive forces measured are consistent with the literature. With dual instrumented arms, this device allows for further investigation into the source of measured vaginal closure forces.