Nilsson A L, Eriksson L E, Nilsson G E
Int J Microcirc Clin Exp. 1986;5(1):11-25.
Local areas of the thighs, palms and fingertips of ten healthy subjects were exposed to cold (10 degrees C) and warm (40 degrees C) air flows of three different velocities, 0.25, 0.50 and 0.75 m/s. The rewarming followed immediately after the cooling. Each climatic condition was applied for 45 min. Skin blood flow and skin temperature were continuously measured by laser Doppler flowmetry and thermometry, respectively. Significant (p less than 0.01 or less) reductions in both skin blood flow and skin temperature, compared to the levels recorded in the room climate, were observed at all the test sites and for all the cooling climates. During cooling no significant differences were obtained between skin blood flow levels reached for the different air velocities, except for the palm (p less than 0.01). Rewarming by the air velocities 0.25 and 0.50 m/s could not even bring the palm skin blood flow back to the precooling levels, while the fingertip (except for the low air velocity) and the thigh showed a hyperaemic reaction. The discrepancies in response pattern between the test sites are interpreted to be due to their different microvasculature and vasomotor innervation. The relationship between skin blood flow and skin temperature was found to be exponential. The correlation coefficients were 0.84, 0.72 and 0.85 for the thigh, palm and fingertip, respectively.
让10名健康受试者的大腿局部区域、手掌和指尖暴露于三种不同流速(0.25、0.50和0.75米/秒)的冷空气(10摄氏度)和热空气(40摄氏度)中。冷却后立即进行复温。每种气候条件持续45分钟。分别通过激光多普勒血流仪和温度计连续测量皮肤血流量和皮肤温度。与室温条件下记录的水平相比,在所有测试部位和所有冷却气候条件下,皮肤血流量和皮肤温度均显著(p小于0.01或更低)降低。在冷却过程中,除手掌外(p小于0.01),不同风速下达到的皮肤血流量水平之间未观察到显著差异。0.25和0.50米/秒风速的复温甚至无法使手掌皮肤血流量恢复到预冷水平,而指尖(低风速除外)和大腿则出现充血反应。测试部位之间反应模式的差异被解释为是由于它们不同的微血管结构和血管运动神经支配。发现皮肤血流量与皮肤温度之间的关系呈指数关系。大腿、手掌和指尖的相关系数分别为0.84、0.72和0.85。