ArticleScientific reports2026
Exploring intermittent pneumatic compression parameters to optimize venous peak velocity and flow duration.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a significant risk in patients with prolonged immobility. Intermittent pneumatic compression devices (IPCDs) are recommended for DVT prevention, yet optimal compression parameters remain poorly defined. This proof-of-concept pilot study evaluated the hemodynamic impact of varying IPCD compression pressures and sequences in healthy volunteers simulating lower-limb immobilization, using a programmable prototype with adjustable settings. Twelve participants underwent continuous Doppler ultrasound measurement of peak systolic velocity (PSV) in the common femoral vein during three compression modes: simultaneous 30 mmHg, simultaneous 50 mmHg, and sequential 30 mmHg. All modes significantly increased PSV compared to resting baseline (per-participant means, n = 12, paired t-tests). Simultaneous 30 mmHg produced the highest and most consistent augmentation (mean PSV 40.06 ± 1.53 cm/s; 90% increase from baseline; t(11) = 29.1, p < 0.0001, Cohen’s d = 8.39). Simultaneous 50 mmHg showed significant but more variable augmentation (30.45 ± 6.33 cm/s; t(11) = 4.26, p = 0.001), with a dipping phenomenon in five participants consistent with possible venous occlusion at higher pressures. Sequential 30 mmHg produced the longest augmented flow duration (mean 4.49 s versus 1.85 s for simultaneous 30 mmHg), suggesting greater total venous volume displacement despite lower peak velocity. These findings provide a hemodynamic foundation for IPCD parameter optimization, with clinical validation in patient populations required before implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.