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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2003-01, Vol.47 (1), p.58-64 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
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&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 |