Advertisement

On the Use of van der Pauw Technique to Monitor Skin Burning in Patients Undergoing Interferential Current Therapy (IFC) with Extension to Other E-Stim Monitoring

  • Lawrence V. Hmurcik
  • Sarosh Patel
  • Navarun Gupta
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 738)

Abstract

Interferential Current (IFC) therapy is routinely used on patients in order to reduce pain, to speed up the healing of wounds in muscles, and to strengthen muscles and bodily structure. The van der Pauw (vdP) technique is a process used to measure a material’s sheet resistance when the material has a geometric shape that has a uniform thickness, but whose other two dimensions are arbitrary. By combining these techniques, the skin’s sheet resistance can be measured before, after, and during IFC therapy, and this will show a disturbance in skin sheet resistance caused by accidental burning. This technique can also be extended to monitoring TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) and other types of e-stim monitoring.

Keywords

Interferential current van der Pauw Skin resistance Electrical burns 

References

  1. 1.
    W. Hart, A five-part resistor-capacitor network for measurement of voltage and current levels related to electric shock and burns, in Proceedings of the First International Symposium on electrical Shock Safety Criteria, (Pergamon Press, New York, 1985)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. G. Webster (ed.), Electrical Impedance Tomography (Taylor & Francis Group, Milton Park, 1990)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J.R. Macdonald, Impedance Spectroscopy, vol vol. 11 (Wiley, New York, 1987)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G.C. Goats, Interferential current therapy. Br. J. Sports Med. 24(2), 87 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M.I. Johnson, G. Tabasam, An investigation into the analgesic effects of interferental currents and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on experimentally induced ischemic pain in otherwise pain-free volunteers. Phys. Ther. 83(3), 208 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Snyder-Mackler, A.J. Robinson, Clinical Electrophysiology: Electrotherapy and Electrophysiologic Testing (Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, 1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E.A. White, M.E. Orazem, A.L. Bunge, Single-frequency LCR databridge impedance measurements as surrogate measures for the integrity of human skin. J. Electrochem. Soc. 159(12), G161–G165 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    L. van der Pauyv, A method of measuring specific resistivity and Hall effect of discs of arbitrary shape. Philips Res. Rep. 13, 1–9 (1958)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    L.J. van der Pauw, A method of measuring the resistivity and Hall coefficient on lamellae of arbitrary shape. Philips Res. Rep. 20, 220–224 (1959)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    L.V. Hmurcik, A. Bidarian, B. Ibarra, L.D. Matthews, A technique for measuring the 3-dimensional to 2-dimensional conductivity change of YBCO superconductors at the normal-to-superconducting phase change. J. Mater. Sci. 33(23), 5653–5659 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J.G. Webster, Electrical Measurement, Signal Processing, and Displays (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    K.S. Ford, M.W. Shrader, J. Smith, T.J. Mclean, D.L. Dahm, Full-thickness burn formation after the use of electrical stimulation for rehabilitation of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J. Arthroplast. 20(7), 950–953 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    E.K. Satter, Third-degree burns incurred as a result of interferential current therapy. Am. J. Dermatopathol. 30(3), 281–283 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.D. Wasscher, Note on four-point resistivity measurements on anisotropic conductors. Philips Res. Rep. 16, 301–306 (1961)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    I. Miccoli, F. Edler, H. Pfnür, C. Tegenkamp, The 100th anniversary of the four-point probe technique: the role of probe geometries in isotropic and anisotropic systems. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 27(22), 223201 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    S.H.N. Lim, D.R. McKenzie, M.M.M. Bilek, Van der Pauw method for measuring resistivity of a plane sample with distant boundaries. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 80(7), 075109 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    D.K. De Vries, A.D. Wieck, Potential distribution in the van der Pauw technique. Am. J. Phys. 63(12), 1074–1078 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    L.A. Geddes, Handbook of Electrical Hazards and Accidents (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence V. Hmurcik
    • 1
  • Sarosh Patel
    • 1
  • Navarun Gupta
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electrical EngineeringUniversity of BridgeportBridgeportUSA

Personalised recommendations