Journal of Applied Physiology Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Appl Physiol 56: 211-216, 1984;
8750-7587/84 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Muza, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by Zechman, F. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Muza, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by Zechman, F. W.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 56, Issue 1 211-216, Copyright © 1984 by American Physiological Society

ARTICLES

Comparison of subjects' perception of inspiratory and expiratory resistance

S. R. Muza, S. McDonald and F. W. Zechman

Six healthy male adults were studied at five levels of suprathreshold added resistance (delta R) applied thrice to either inspiration (I) or expiration (E) in a random sequence. Subjects squeezed on isometric handgrip dynamometer to express the perceived magnitude of the load. Peak mouth pressure (Pm), flow, grip (G), and delta R were analyzed to derive the exponent for Steven's power law. We observed that the slope for log G vs. log delta R was significantly greater for I loads than for E loads (P less than 0.05), but the intercepts for E loads were significantly elevated. However, the slopes and intercepts for log G vs. log Pm during the same I and E loads were not significantly different. When subjects were instructed to target I or E flow to a preset level, we observed no difference between the slopes and intercepts for log G vs. log delta R during I and E loading. These results suggest that 1) the sensory information utilized in judging the magnitude of added resistance is more likely related to the force generated by the respiratory muscles (Pm) rather than delta R per se; and 2) similar muscle receptors and neural processing systems are utilized in the estimation of added loads involving either inspiratory or expiratory muscle groups.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Appl. Physiol.Home page
B. Kayser, P. Sliwinski, S. Yan, M. Tobiasz, and P. T. Macklem
Respiratory effort sensation during exercise with induced expiratory-flow limitation in healthy humans
J Appl Physiol, September 1, 1997; 83(3): 936 - 947.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online