Department of HPER, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI, USA.
J Sports Sci Med. 2008 Jun 1;7(2):286-91. eCollection 2008.
The purpose of the study was to determine whether uniform intramuscular heating is achieved throughout a treatment area 2 times the transducer head at both 1 and 3 MHz. Seven male and three female subjects (Age: 23.6 ± 1.0 yrs, Weight: 83.8 ± 23.2 kg, Site Skinfold: 13.9 ± 7.3 mm) underwent two ultrasound treatments (1 and 3 MHz) in the triceps surae muscle group. Thermocouples were inserted at the midpoint and periphery of the treatment area. Ten minute baseline temperatures were recorded followed by a ten minute ultrasound treatment. Two (site) X 10 (time) repeated measures ANOVAs were separately used to determine significance for 1 and 3 MHz treatments. Post-hoc testing was performed using the Bonferroni adjustment. A significant site-by-time interaction was observed for both the 1 and 3 MHz treatments. From baseline to the end of the treatment, temperature increased approximately 2.62°C and 1.58°C for the midpoint and periphery of the 1 MHz treatment and 5.88°C and 3.64°C for the 3 MHz treatment. The differences in temperature suggest that uniform heating does not occur throughout the treatment area. Key points3 MHz is more effective in raising intramuscular temperature within ERA.Stroke count/rate of transducer may play a factor in heating tissue.Treatment size may alter uniform heating.
本研究旨在确定在 1MHz 和 3MHz 时,治疗区域是换能器头部的 2 倍大时,是否能实现整个治疗区域的均匀肌肉内加热。7 名男性和 3 名女性受试者(年龄:23.6±1.0 岁,体重:83.8±23.2 公斤,皮肤褶皱部位:13.9±7.3 毫米)在比目鱼肌群中接受了两次超声治疗(1MHz 和 3MHz)。在治疗区域的中点和外围插入热电偶。记录 10 分钟的基线温度,然后进行 10 分钟的超声治疗。分别使用 2(部位)×10(时间)重复测量方差分析来确定 1MHz 和 3MHz 治疗的显著性。使用 Bonferroni 调整进行事后检验。1MHz 和 3MHz 治疗均观察到部位-时间交互作用显著。从基线到治疗结束时,1MHz 治疗的中点和外围温度分别升高了约 2.62°C 和 1.58°C,3MHz 治疗的中点和外围温度分别升高了 5.88°C 和 3.64°C。温度差异表明,治疗区域内并未实现均匀加热。关键点3MHz 在提高 ERA 内肌肉内温度方面更有效。探头的冲程数/频率可能是加热组织的一个因素。治疗面积可能会改变均匀加热。