| Budget Amount *help |
¥3,400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥3,400,000)
Fiscal Year 2006: ¥500,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000)
Fiscal Year 2005: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
Fiscal Year 2004: ¥2,200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,200,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
1. OBJECTIVES:
(1) To confirm whether bathing feet in artificial high carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration spring water created with the help of a CO2-releasing bath additive developed by us (bath additive foot bathing) promoted blood circulation in the skin of the lower extremities, and helped in preventing necrosis in the lower extremities of patients on dialysis for diabetic nephropathy, and (2) to develop it as a simple healthcare treatment for such patients.
2. METHODS:
(1) Twenty two healthy subjects and 11 patients of diabetic nephropathy undergoing dialysis were all given 3 different types of foot baths, i.e., bath additive foot bathing, foot bathing in an artificial CO2 thermal spring device that produces water with high CO2 concentration (foot bath device), and a foot bathing with warm water alone. Measurements were made with a laser Doppler skin blood flow meter, etc and compared to verify the extremity blood circulation enhancing effect.
(2) 9 patients on dialysis for diabetic ne
… More
phropathy were requested to practice the bath additive foot bathing for one month. Weekly observations were made on changes in the condition of the lower extremities, and the patients were questioned about the details of their foot bathing to determine whether it was a therapeutic procedure that could be continued for a long time.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:
(1) The Friedman test and the Wilcoxon signed rank test showed that bath additive foot bathing and foot bath device foot bathing gave results that were significantly different (p<0.05) from foot bathing with warm water alone, with regard to the increase in percent change in cutaneous blood flow on the dorsal side of both feet, suggesting that the former two methods of foot bathing produced a greater increase in cutaneous blood flow, compared to the warm water foot bathing. There was no significant difference between bath additive foot bathing and the foot bath device, and it was concluded that both these types of bathing had similar effects.
(2) All 9 patients who undertook bath additive foot bathing at their homes could continue the treatment for one month. In their subjective evaluation, they reported experiencing warmth, moistness of the skin, and improved mobility of joints and muscles, in the feet. Less
|
