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


     


J Appl Physiol 67: 699-706, 1989;
8750-7587/89 $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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Younes, M.
Right arrow Articles by Sanii, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Younes, M.
Right arrow Articles by Sanii, R.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 67, Issue 2 699-706, Copyright © 1989 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Effect of phase shifts in pressure-flow relationship on response to inspiratory resistance

M. Younes and R. Sanii
Department of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.

Inspiratory prolongation is an integral component of the response to added inspiratory resistance. To ascertain whether this response depends on the relation between inspiratory flow (V) and the pressure perturbation, we compared the responses when this relationship was made progressively less distinct by creating phase shifts between V and the resulting negative mouth pressure (Pm). This was done with an apparatus that altered Pm in proportion to V (J. Appl. Physiol. 62:2491-2499, 1987). V was passed through low-pass electronic filters of different frequency responses before serving as the command signal to the apparatus. In six normal subjects the average neural inspiratory duration (TI) response (delta TI) was sharply (P less than 0.01) reduced (0.32 +/- 0.07 to 0.12 +/- 0.07 s) when the filter's frequency response decreased from 7.5 to 3.0 Hz. The TI response was essentially flat between tube resistance (i.e., no lag, delta TI = 0.36 +/- 0.11 s) and the 7.5-Hz filter, and there was no further change in TI response with filters having a frequency response less than 3.0 Hz, with all TI responses in this range being not significant. Subjects could not consciously perceive a difference between various filter settings. We conclude that the TI response is critically influenced by the phase of the negative pressure wave relative to TI. Furthermore the TI responses are not deliberate, although consciousness is required for their elicitation.





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