Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluation of gloves as a water bag coupling agent for therapeutic ultrasound
Lima, Lúcio Salustiano de; Oliveira, Débora Paulino; Costa-Júnior, José Francisco Silva; Pinto, Pâmela Alves; Omena, Thaís Pionório; Costa, Rejane Medeiros; von Krüger, Marco Antônio; Pereira, Wagner Coelho de Albuquerque.
  • Lima, Lúcio Salustiano de; Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Biomedical Engineering Program. Rio de Janeiro. BR
  • Oliveira, Débora Paulino; Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Biomedical Engineering Program. Rio de Janeiro. BR
  • Costa-Júnior, José Francisco Silva; Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Biomedical Engineering Program. Rio de Janeiro. BR
  • Pinto, Pâmela Alves; Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Biomedical Engineering Program. Rio de Janeiro. BR
  • Omena, Thaís Pionório; Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Biomedical Engineering Program. Rio de Janeiro. BR
  • Costa, Rejane Medeiros; Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Biomedical Engineering Program. Rio de Janeiro. BR
  • von Krüger, Marco Antônio; Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Biomedical Engineering Program. Rio de Janeiro. BR
  • Pereira, Wagner Coelho de Albuquerque; Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Biomedical Engineering Program. Rio de Janeiro. BR
Res. Biomed. Eng. (Online) ; 33(1): 42-49, Mar. 2017. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-842478
ABSTRACT
Abstract Introduction Therapeutic ultrasound (TUS) is a widespread modality in physiotherapy, and the water bag technique is a coupling method employed in the presence of anatomical irregularities in the treatment area. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the acoustic attenuation of the water bag and its effectiveness as a TUS coupling agent. Methods The rated output powers (ROPs) of the TUS equipment were evaluated based on IEC 61689. Then, a radiation force balance was used to measure ROP with and without a water bag (latex and nitrile gloves filled with deionized water) between a TUS transducer and the cone-shaped target of the balance. Each experiment was performed five times for each nominal power (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0 W) and in the following configurations without the water bag (A), with nitrile gloves and with (B) and without (C) a height controller, and latex gloves with (D) and without (E) height controller. ROPs obtained in different media were compared. Results The highest relative error of ROP was 16.72% for 0.5 W. Although the power values of the equipment were within the range recommended by IEC, there was a significant difference between the ROP values measured with A and with B, C and D. Conclusion As intensity differences below 0.5 W/cm2 are considered clinically not relevant, conditions A, B, C, D, or E can be used interchangeably.


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Language: English Journal: Res. Biomed. Eng. (Online) Journal subject: Engenharia Biom‚dica Year: 2017 Type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil Institution/Affiliation country: Federal University of Rio de Janeiro/BR

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Language: English Journal: Res. Biomed. Eng. (Online) Journal subject: Engenharia Biom‚dica Year: 2017 Type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil Institution/Affiliation country: Federal University of Rio de Janeiro/BR