Comparison of forced-air warming systems with lower body blankets using a copper manikin of the human body

Background: Forced‐air warming has gained high acceptance as a measure for the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia. However, data on heat transfer with lower body blankets are not yet available. This study was conducted to determine the heat transfer efficacy of six complete lower body warming...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2003-01, Vol.47 (1), p.58-64
Hauptverfasser: Bräuer, A., English, M. J. M., Lorenz, N., Steinmetz, N., Perl, T., Braun, U., Weyland, W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 64
container_issue 1
container_start_page 58
container_title Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
container_volume 47
creator Bräuer, A.
English, M. J. M.
Lorenz, N.
Steinmetz, N.
Perl, T.
Braun, U.
Weyland, W.
description Background: Forced‐air warming has gained high acceptance as a measure for the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia. However, data on heat transfer with lower body blankets are not yet available. This study was conducted to determine the heat transfer efficacy of six complete lower body warming systems. Methods: Heat transfer of forced‐air warmers can be described as follows: [1] Q˙=h·ΔT·A where Q˙ = heat transfer [W], h = heat exchange coefficient [W m−2 °C−1], ΔT = temperature gradient between blanket and surface [°C], A = covered area [m2]. We tested the following forced‐air warmers in a previously validated copper manikin of the human body: (1) Bair Hugger® and lower body blanket (Augustine Medical Inc., Eden Prairie, MN); (2) Thermacare® and lower body blanket (Gaymar Industries, Orchard Park, NY); (3) WarmAir® and lower body blanket (Cincinnati Sub‐Zero Products, Cincinnati, OH); (4) Warm‐Gard® and lower body blanket (Luis Gibeck AB, Upplands Väsby, Sweden); (5) Warm‐Gard® and reusable lower body blanket (Luis Gibeck AB); and (6) WarmTouch® and lower body blanket (Mallinckrodt Medical Inc., St. Luis, MO). Heat flux and surface temperature were measured with 16 calibrated heat flux transducers. Blanket temperature was measured using 16 thermocouples. ΔT was varied between −10 and +10 °C and h was determined by a linear regression analysis as the slope of ΔT vs. heat flux. Mean ΔT was determined for surface temperatures between 36 and 38 °C, because similar mean skin temperatures have been found in volunteers. The area covered by the blankets was estimated to be 0.54 m2. Results: Heat transfer from the blanket to the manikin was different for surface temperatures between 36 °C and 38 °C. At a surface temperature of 36 °C the heat transfer was higher (between 13.4 W to 18.3 W) than at surface temperatures of 38 °C (8–11.5 W). The highest heat transfer was delivered by the Thermacare® system (8.3–18.3 W), the lowest heat transfer was delivered by the Warm‐Gard® system with the single use blanket (8–13.4 W). The heat exchange coefficient varied between 12.5 W m−2°C−1 and 30.8 W m−2°C−1, mean ΔT varied between 1.04 °C and 2.48 °C for surface temperatures of 36 °C and between 0.50 °C and 1.63 °C for surface temperatures of 38 °C. Conclusion: No relevant differences in heat transfer of lower body blankets were found between the different forced‐air warming systems tested. Heat transfer was lower than heat transfer by upper body blankets tested in a previ
doi_str_mv 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.470110.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72889369</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>72889369</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4380-785d8a54327b216fa49fade2e90d3d2c716499faa9b0c14cfe02ac27fcdc3af03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUuP0zAUhS0EYsrAX0BmAbsUP5I43lFVMIMY8dCAhp1149jUbVIHO1Hbf48zqWa2rPw43z2-9xihN5QsKeH5--2ScimzshDlkhHCl7kgNInHJ2jxoDxFC0IIzQoq2AV6EeM2HXku5XN0QVkumZDVAm3XvushuOj32FtsfdCmycAFfIDQuf0fHE9xMF3EBzdscOsPJuDaNydct7DfmSHiMU4YYO37Pokd7N3O3bsNG4M3Y7q4r3iJnlloo3l1Xi_Rr08ff66vs5tvV5_Xq5tM57wimaiKpoIi50zUjJYWcmmhMcxI0vCGaUHLNIQFkDXRNNfWEAaaCasbzcESfonezb598H9HEwfVuahNm_o1foxKsKqSvJQJlDOog48xGKv64DoIJ0WJmoJWWzXFqaY41RS0moNWx1T7-vzIWHemeaw8J5uAt2cAoobWBthrFx-5PE1IyzJxH2bu4Fpz-v8O1Gp1O--TRTZbuPRTxwcLCDtVCi4Kdff1SonrLz9-38lb9Z3_A_MAqv0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72889369</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of forced-air warming systems with lower body blankets using a copper manikin of the human body</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Bräuer, A. ; English, M. J. M. ; Lorenz, N. ; Steinmetz, N. ; Perl, T. ; Braun, U. ; Weyland, W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bräuer, A. ; English, M. J. M. ; Lorenz, N. ; Steinmetz, N. ; Perl, T. ; Braun, U. ; Weyland, W.</creatorcontrib><description>Background: Forced‐air warming has gained high acceptance as a measure for the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia. However, data on heat transfer with lower body blankets are not yet available. This study was conducted to determine the heat transfer efficacy of six complete lower body warming systems. Methods: Heat transfer of forced‐air warmers can be described as follows: [1] Q˙=h·ΔT·A where Q˙ = heat transfer [W], h = heat exchange coefficient [W m−2 °C−1], ΔT = temperature gradient between blanket and surface [°C], A = covered area [m2]. We tested the following forced‐air warmers in a previously validated copper manikin of the human body: (1) Bair Hugger® and lower body blanket (Augustine Medical Inc., Eden Prairie, MN); (2) Thermacare® and lower body blanket (Gaymar Industries, Orchard Park, NY); (3) WarmAir® and lower body blanket (Cincinnati Sub‐Zero Products, Cincinnati, OH); (4) Warm‐Gard® and lower body blanket (Luis Gibeck AB, Upplands Väsby, Sweden); (5) Warm‐Gard® and reusable lower body blanket (Luis Gibeck AB); and (6) WarmTouch® and lower body blanket (Mallinckrodt Medical Inc., St. Luis, MO). Heat flux and surface temperature were measured with 16 calibrated heat flux transducers. Blanket temperature was measured using 16 thermocouples. ΔT was varied between −10 and +10 °C and h was determined by a linear regression analysis as the slope of ΔT vs. heat flux. Mean ΔT was determined for surface temperatures between 36 and 38 °C, because similar mean skin temperatures have been found in volunteers. The area covered by the blankets was estimated to be 0.54 m2. Results: Heat transfer from the blanket to the manikin was different for surface temperatures between 36 °C and 38 °C. At a surface temperature of 36 °C the heat transfer was higher (between 13.4 W to 18.3 W) than at surface temperatures of 38 °C (8–11.5 W). The highest heat transfer was delivered by the Thermacare® system (8.3–18.3 W), the lowest heat transfer was delivered by the Warm‐Gard® system with the single use blanket (8–13.4 W). The heat exchange coefficient varied between 12.5 W m−2°C−1 and 30.8 W m−2°C−1, mean ΔT varied between 1.04 °C and 2.48 °C for surface temperatures of 36 °C and between 0.50 °C and 1.63 °C for surface temperatures of 38 °C. Conclusion: No relevant differences in heat transfer of lower body blankets were found between the different forced‐air warming systems tested. Heat transfer was lower than heat transfer by upper body blankets tested in a previous study. However, forced‐air warming systems with lower body blankets are still more effective than forced‐air warming systems with upper body blankets in the prevention of perioperative hypothermia, because they cover a larger area of the body surface.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-5172</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1399-6576</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.470110.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12492798</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AANEAB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><subject>Air Movements ; Algorithms ; Anesthesia ; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Anesthesia: equipment, devices ; Biological and medical sciences ; Convection ; Copper ; Data Interpretation, Statistical ; Forced-air warming systems ; heat exchange ; Hot Temperature ; Humans ; hypothermia ; manikin ; Manikins ; Medical sciences ; perioperative ; Rewarming - instrumentation ; Temperature ; warming devices</subject><ispartof>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2003-01, Vol.47 (1), p.58-64</ispartof><rights>2003 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4380-785d8a54327b216fa49fade2e90d3d2c716499faa9b0c14cfe02ac27fcdc3af03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4380-785d8a54327b216fa49fade2e90d3d2c716499faa9b0c14cfe02ac27fcdc3af03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1034%2Fj.1399-6576.2003.470110.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1034%2Fj.1399-6576.2003.470110.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,4024,27923,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=14543166$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12492798$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bräuer, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>English, M. J. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lorenz, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steinmetz, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perl, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Braun, U.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weyland, W.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of forced-air warming systems with lower body blankets using a copper manikin of the human body</title><title>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</title><addtitle>Acta Anaesthesiol Scand</addtitle><description>Background: Forced‐air warming has gained high acceptance as a measure for the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia. However, data on heat transfer with lower body blankets are not yet available. This study was conducted to determine the heat transfer efficacy of six complete lower body warming systems. Methods: Heat transfer of forced‐air warmers can be described as follows: [1] Q˙=h·ΔT·A where Q˙ = heat transfer [W], h = heat exchange coefficient [W m−2 °C−1], ΔT = temperature gradient between blanket and surface [°C], A = covered area [m2]. We tested the following forced‐air warmers in a previously validated copper manikin of the human body: (1) Bair Hugger® and lower body blanket (Augustine Medical Inc., Eden Prairie, MN); (2) Thermacare® and lower body blanket (Gaymar Industries, Orchard Park, NY); (3) WarmAir® and lower body blanket (Cincinnati Sub‐Zero Products, Cincinnati, OH); (4) Warm‐Gard® and lower body blanket (Luis Gibeck AB, Upplands Väsby, Sweden); (5) Warm‐Gard® and reusable lower body blanket (Luis Gibeck AB); and (6) WarmTouch® and lower body blanket (Mallinckrodt Medical Inc., St. Luis, MO). Heat flux and surface temperature were measured with 16 calibrated heat flux transducers. Blanket temperature was measured using 16 thermocouples. ΔT was varied between −10 and +10 °C and h was determined by a linear regression analysis as the slope of ΔT vs. heat flux. Mean ΔT was determined for surface temperatures between 36 and 38 °C, because similar mean skin temperatures have been found in volunteers. The area covered by the blankets was estimated to be 0.54 m2. Results: Heat transfer from the blanket to the manikin was different for surface temperatures between 36 °C and 38 °C. At a surface temperature of 36 °C the heat transfer was higher (between 13.4 W to 18.3 W) than at surface temperatures of 38 °C (8–11.5 W). The highest heat transfer was delivered by the Thermacare® system (8.3–18.3 W), the lowest heat transfer was delivered by the Warm‐Gard® system with the single use blanket (8–13.4 W). The heat exchange coefficient varied between 12.5 W m−2°C−1 and 30.8 W m−2°C−1, mean ΔT varied between 1.04 °C and 2.48 °C for surface temperatures of 36 °C and between 0.50 °C and 1.63 °C for surface temperatures of 38 °C. Conclusion: No relevant differences in heat transfer of lower body blankets were found between the different forced‐air warming systems tested. Heat transfer was lower than heat transfer by upper body blankets tested in a previous study. However, forced‐air warming systems with lower body blankets are still more effective than forced‐air warming systems with upper body blankets in the prevention of perioperative hypothermia, because they cover a larger area of the body surface.</description><subject>Air Movements</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Anesthesia</subject><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Anesthesia: equipment, devices</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Convection</subject><subject>Copper</subject><subject>Data Interpretation, Statistical</subject><subject>Forced-air warming systems</subject><subject>heat exchange</subject><subject>Hot Temperature</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>hypothermia</subject><subject>manikin</subject><subject>Manikins</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>perioperative</subject><subject>Rewarming - instrumentation</subject><subject>Temperature</subject><subject>warming devices</subject><issn>0001-5172</issn><issn>1399-6576</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUuP0zAUhS0EYsrAX0BmAbsUP5I43lFVMIMY8dCAhp1149jUbVIHO1Hbf48zqWa2rPw43z2-9xihN5QsKeH5--2ScimzshDlkhHCl7kgNInHJ2jxoDxFC0IIzQoq2AV6EeM2HXku5XN0QVkumZDVAm3XvushuOj32FtsfdCmycAFfIDQuf0fHE9xMF3EBzdscOsPJuDaNydct7DfmSHiMU4YYO37Pokd7N3O3bsNG4M3Y7q4r3iJnlloo3l1Xi_Rr08ff66vs5tvV5_Xq5tM57wimaiKpoIi50zUjJYWcmmhMcxI0vCGaUHLNIQFkDXRNNfWEAaaCasbzcESfonezb598H9HEwfVuahNm_o1foxKsKqSvJQJlDOog48xGKv64DoIJ0WJmoJWWzXFqaY41RS0moNWx1T7-vzIWHemeaw8J5uAt2cAoobWBthrFx-5PE1IyzJxH2bu4Fpz-v8O1Gp1O--TRTZbuPRTxwcLCDtVCi4Kdff1SonrLz9-38lb9Z3_A_MAqv0</recordid><startdate>200301</startdate><enddate>200301</enddate><creator>Bräuer, A.</creator><creator>English, M. J. M.</creator><creator>Lorenz, N.</creator><creator>Steinmetz, N.</creator><creator>Perl, T.</creator><creator>Braun, U.</creator><creator>Weyland, W.</creator><general>Munksgaard International Publishers</general><general>Blackwell</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200301</creationdate><title>Comparison of forced-air warming systems with lower body blankets using a copper manikin of the human body</title><author>Bräuer, A. ; English, M. J. M. ; Lorenz, N. ; Steinmetz, N. ; Perl, T. ; Braun, U. ; Weyland, W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4380-785d8a54327b216fa49fade2e90d3d2c716499faa9b0c14cfe02ac27fcdc3af03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Air Movements</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Anesthesia</topic><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Anesthesia: equipment, devices</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Convection</topic><topic>Copper</topic><topic>Data Interpretation, Statistical</topic><topic>Forced-air warming systems</topic><topic>heat exchange</topic><topic>Hot Temperature</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>hypothermia</topic><topic>manikin</topic><topic>Manikins</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>perioperative</topic><topic>Rewarming - instrumentation</topic><topic>Temperature</topic><topic>warming devices</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bräuer, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>English, M. J. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lorenz, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steinmetz, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perl, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Braun, U.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weyland, W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bräuer, A.</au><au>English, M. J. M.</au><au>Lorenz, N.</au><au>Steinmetz, N.</au><au>Perl, T.</au><au>Braun, U.</au><au>Weyland, W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of forced-air warming systems with lower body blankets using a copper manikin of the human body</atitle><jtitle>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Anaesthesiol Scand</addtitle><date>2003-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>58</spage><epage>64</epage><pages>58-64</pages><issn>0001-5172</issn><eissn>1399-6576</eissn><coden>AANEAB</coden><abstract>Background: Forced‐air warming has gained high acceptance as a measure for the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia. However, data on heat transfer with lower body blankets are not yet available. This study was conducted to determine the heat transfer efficacy of six complete lower body warming systems. Methods: Heat transfer of forced‐air warmers can be described as follows: [1] Q˙=h·ΔT·A where Q˙ = heat transfer [W], h = heat exchange coefficient [W m−2 °C−1], ΔT = temperature gradient between blanket and surface [°C], A = covered area [m2]. We tested the following forced‐air warmers in a previously validated copper manikin of the human body: (1) Bair Hugger® and lower body blanket (Augustine Medical Inc., Eden Prairie, MN); (2) Thermacare® and lower body blanket (Gaymar Industries, Orchard Park, NY); (3) WarmAir® and lower body blanket (Cincinnati Sub‐Zero Products, Cincinnati, OH); (4) Warm‐Gard® and lower body blanket (Luis Gibeck AB, Upplands Väsby, Sweden); (5) Warm‐Gard® and reusable lower body blanket (Luis Gibeck AB); and (6) WarmTouch® and lower body blanket (Mallinckrodt Medical Inc., St. Luis, MO). Heat flux and surface temperature were measured with 16 calibrated heat flux transducers. Blanket temperature was measured using 16 thermocouples. ΔT was varied between −10 and +10 °C and h was determined by a linear regression analysis as the slope of ΔT vs. heat flux. Mean ΔT was determined for surface temperatures between 36 and 38 °C, because similar mean skin temperatures have been found in volunteers. The area covered by the blankets was estimated to be 0.54 m2. Results: Heat transfer from the blanket to the manikin was different for surface temperatures between 36 °C and 38 °C. At a surface temperature of 36 °C the heat transfer was higher (between 13.4 W to 18.3 W) than at surface temperatures of 38 °C (8–11.5 W). The highest heat transfer was delivered by the Thermacare® system (8.3–18.3 W), the lowest heat transfer was delivered by the Warm‐Gard® system with the single use blanket (8–13.4 W). The heat exchange coefficient varied between 12.5 W m−2°C−1 and 30.8 W m−2°C−1, mean ΔT varied between 1.04 °C and 2.48 °C for surface temperatures of 36 °C and between 0.50 °C and 1.63 °C for surface temperatures of 38 °C. Conclusion: No relevant differences in heat transfer of lower body blankets were found between the different forced‐air warming systems tested. Heat transfer was lower than heat transfer by upper body blankets tested in a previous study. However, forced‐air warming systems with lower body blankets are still more effective than forced‐air warming systems with upper body blankets in the prevention of perioperative hypothermia, because they cover a larger area of the body surface.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Munksgaard International Publishers</pub><pmid>12492798</pmid><doi>10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.470110.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0001-5172
ispartof Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2003-01, Vol.47 (1), p.58-64
issn 0001-5172
1399-6576
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72889369
source MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects Air Movements
Algorithms
Anesthesia
Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy
Anesthesia: equipment, devices
Biological and medical sciences
Convection
Copper
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Forced-air warming systems
heat exchange
Hot Temperature
Humans
hypothermia
manikin
Manikins
Medical sciences
perioperative
Rewarming - instrumentation
Temperature
warming devices
title Comparison of forced-air warming systems with lower body blankets using a copper manikin of the human body
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T13%3A50%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20forced-air%20warming%20systems%20with%20lower%20body%20blankets%20using%20a%20copper%20manikin%20of%20the%20human%20body&rft.jtitle=Acta%20anaesthesiologica%20Scandinavica&rft.au=Br%C3%A4uer,%20A.&rft.date=2003-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=58&rft.epage=64&rft.pages=58-64&rft.issn=0001-5172&rft.eissn=1399-6576&rft.coden=AANEAB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.470110.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72889369%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=72889369&rft_id=info:pmid/12492798&rfr_iscdi=true