An easy-to-implement, non-invasive head restraint method for monkey fMRI

Tanaka R., Watanabe K., Suzuki T., et al. An easy-to-implement, non-invasive head restraint method for monkey fMRI. NeuroImage 285, 120479 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120479.Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in behaving monkeys has a strong potential to bridge the gap between human neuroimaging and primate neurophysiology. In monkey fMRI, to restrain head movements, researchers usually surgically implant a plastic head-post on the skull. Although time-proven to be effective, this technique could create burdens for animals, including a risk of infection and discomfort. Furthermore, the presence of extraneous objects on the skull, such as bone screws and dental cement, adversely affects signals near the cortical surface. These side effects are undesirable in terms of both the practical aspect of efficient data collection and the spirit of “refinement” from the 3R's. Here, we demonstrate that a completely non-invasive fMRI scan in awake monkeys is possible by using a plastic head mask made to fit the skull of individual animals. In all of the three monkeys tested, longitudinal, quantitative assessment of head movements showed that the plastic mask has effectively suppressed head movements, and we were able to obtain reliable retinotopic BOLD signals in a standard retinotopic mapping task. The present, easy-to-make plastic mask has a strong potential to simplify fMRI experiments in awake monkeys, while giving data that is as good as or even better quality than that obtained with the conventional head-post method

The venodilation effects of tapping versus massaging for venipuncture

Aim To compare the effectiveness of tapping and massaging venodilation techniques by evaluating venous cross-sectional area, venous depth, venous palpation score, and questionnaire responses of study participants. Methods This study had a quasi-experimental design. Between August 2016 and October 2016, healthy adult volunteers (n = 30, mean +/- standard deviation of age: 22.3 +/- 2.2 years) were enrolled in this study. Three venodilation techniques were evaluated: the application of a tourniquet (Control Group), the application of a tourniquet and tapping of the participant's forearm (Tapping Group), and the application of a tourniquet and massaging of the participant's forearm (Massage Group). Results In all three groups, venous cross-sectional areas increased significantly after the application of the venodilation technique. The change ratio of venous cross-sectional area was significantly larger in the Massage Group than in the Control Group. Additionally, 83.3% of the participants selected massaging as their preferred venodilation technique, stating the technique was comfortable and provided a feeling of relief. Conclusions No significant differences were observed between the degrees of venodilation that were achieved using the three investigated venodilation techniques. Nonetheless, massaging was deemed the most effective technique after considering the participants' subjective comments

Do Tapping and Massaging during Tourniquet Application Promote Dilation of Forearm Cutaneous Veins? A Pilot Quasi-Experimental Study

Successful insertion of a peripheral intravenous catheterization requires that veins be sufficiently dilated. This study aimed to clarify the venous dilation effect of including tapping or massaging to the application of a tourniquet at the cutaneous veins of healthy adults’ forearms. This was a quasi-experimental study of 30 healthy adult volunteers. Each participant underwent all three venous dilation procedures, which included the tourniquet application (Control condition), the tourniquet application and tapping the participant’s forearm (Tapping condition), as well as the tourniquet application combined with massaging the participant’s forearm (Massage condition). To clarify the venous dilation effects, venous indices were measured, namely the venous diameter (mm), depth (mm), and palpation score. After applying all venous dilation procedures, the venous diameter and palpation score significantly increased. However, no significant difference was observed between the control condition and each intervention condition. The depth in the control and tapping conditions decreased significantly in contrast to the Massage condition. Moreover, a subgroup (nine participants with a venous diameter less than 3 mm after the control condition) had similar results. This study found that additional tapping or massaging after tourniquet application could be less effective in promoting dilation in the forearm veins of healthy adults. Future studies should examine the efficacy and effectiveness of venous dilation in a wide target population while considering intervention methods

Venous dilation effect of hot towel (moist and dry heat) versus hot pack for peripheral intravenous catheterization: a quasi-experimental study

Abstract Background Heat application before peripheral intravenous catheterization is recommended for venous dilation. Hot pack application enlarges the venous diameter in healthy adults; however, hot towels (moist and dry heat) are used often in some medical cases. However, it is unclear whether hot towel application promotes venous dilation better than hot pack application. This study compared the venous dilation effect of using a hot towel (moist and dry heat) to a hot pack before applying the tourniquet at an access site for peripheral intravenous catheterization. Methods Eighty-eight healthy females aged 18–29 years were recruited for this quasi-experimental study. They underwent three types of heat applications (hot pack, moist hot towel, and dry hot towel [moist hot towel wrapped in a dry plastic bag], all of which were warmed to 40 ± 2 °C and performed for 7 min) to their forearm and tourniquet application for 30 s after each heating. Venous diameter and depth were measured using ultrasonography, and venous palpability and visibility (venous assessment score) was observed as venous dilatation effects. In addition, the skin temperature, stratum corneum hydration, and subjective evaluation of the warmth were measured. Results There were no significant differences in venous diameter and assessment scores after intervention between the dry hot towel and the hot pack groups, and the effect size was negligible (Cohen’s d < 0.20). However, these measurements were significantly lower for the moist hot towel than for the other two heat applications (P < .001). Although there was no significant difference in skin temperature and warmth rating score between the dry hot towel and the hot pack, these were significantly lower for the moist hot towel than for the other two heat applications (P < .001). The amount of change in stratum corneum hydration of the dry hot towel was not significantly different from that of the hot pack; however, that of the moist hot towel was significantly larger than that of the other two heat applications (P < . 001.) Conclusions A method in which a towel warmed in hot water is wrapped in a dry barrier may be an alternative to a hot pack. Trial registration This study was registered with University Hospital Medical Information Network in Japan (Registration No.: UMIN000048308. Registered on July 7, 2022)