Cited by 86Non-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringThermoregulation and physiological responsesCardiovascular and exercise physiology

Microvascular blood flow and skin temperature changes in the fingers following a deep inspiratory gasp

Open access
Allen, John, Frame, John R, Murray, Alan·2002·Physiological Measurement

Abstract

The aims of this study were to quantify the changes in finger pulp skin temperature, laser Doppler flow (LDF, microvascular flux) and photoplethysmogram (PPG, microvascular blood volume pulsatility), induced by a deep inspiration in healthy subjects, and to investigate the repeatability of these responses within a measurement session and between measurement sessions on separate days. A system comprising an electronic thermometer, a laser Doppler flowmeter and a PPG amplifier measured simultaneous vasoconstrictor responses to a deep inspiratory gasp from three adjacent fingers of one hand. Clearly defined responses were obtained in 15 of the 17 subjects studied. Skin temperature fell in all of these subjects after each gasp, with a median fall of 0.089 degrees C (P < 0.001). The median value of LDF flux reduction was 93% (P < 0.001) indicating a momentary almost complete shut-down of microvascular blood flow; and PPG also showed a large response relative to pulse amplitude of 2.6 (P < 0.001). The median times for waveforms to reach their minimum were 4.6 s (PPG), 6.3 s (LDF) and 29.1 s (skin pulp temperature), with median delays between minima of LDF and PPG of 1.6 s (P < 0.001) and skin temperature and PPG of 23.5 s (P < 0.001). The vascular responses of skin temperature, LDF and PPG to an inspiratory gasp were repeatable, with temperature change repeatable to within 10% of the median subject change.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0967-3334/23/2/312

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Allen et al. reported a 2.6-times increase in PPG amplitude, 93% decrease in LDF flux, and median decrease of 0.089 degrees Celsius following a deep inspiratory gasp of air.

    “They reported a 2.6-times increase in PPG amplitude, 93% decrease in LDF flux, and median decrease of 0.089 degrees Celsius [150].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Allen, J., Frame, J. R., & Murray, A.
Affiliations
  • Freeman Hospital (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
Venue
Physiological Measurement
Published
2002-03-14
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
365-373
ISSN
  • 0967-3334 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6579
OpenAlex
W2048672539
Cited by
86
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physiological Measurement (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Thermoregulation and physiological responses
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Keywords
microvascular blood flow, skin temperature, finger pulp, laser Doppler flowmetry, photoplethysmography, vasoconstriction, repeatability
MeSH terms
Adult, Fingers, Humans, Male, Microcirculation, Regional Blood Flow, Skin, Skin Temperature, Respiratory Mechanics, Laser-Doppler Flowmetry, Photoplethysmography

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review