JP2007044291A - Mouthpiece and mouth filter - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a mouthpiece reducing the leakage of respiratory air, preventing its popping-out from the mouth even if performing an expiratory effort, having high strength against a chewing force and dispensing with the cooperation and effort of a subject, in regard to the mouthpiece used for a respiratory function test and the improvement of a mouth filter formed by integrating the mouthpiece with the filter. <P>SOLUTION: The diameter of a portion of a distance (l) from one end of the mouthpiece is reduced and gradually formed into a circular shape toward the end part. The similar treatment is made to the mouthpiece part of the mouth filter formed by integrating the mouthpiece with the filter. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2007,JPO&INPIT

Description

The present invention relates to an improvement in a mouthpiece used in a respiratory function test or the like, and a mouth filter in which a mouthpiece and a filter are integrated.

As shown in FIG. 5 (A), the respiratory function test is performed by connecting a mouthpiece 42 to a respiratory flow meter 41, holding the mouthpiece 42 to a subject, and performing predetermined breathing such as forced breathing on the subject. In this test, the flow rate of air entering and exiting the lung is measured to obtain parameters necessary for diagnosis.
Recently, in order to ensure infection response, a filter 44 is often used as shown in FIG. Reference numeral 43 in FIG. 5B denotes a filter medium.
Further, since it is troublesome to connect the mouthpiece and the filter for each inspection, a mouth filter as shown in FIG. 7 in which the mouthpiece 42 and the filter 44 in FIG. 5B are integrated is also used. (For example, Patent Document 1). In FIG. 7, 41 is a mouthpiece part, 42 is a filter part, and 43 is a filter medium. Mouse filters have a lot of plasticity.

Some mouthpieces can be reused after disinfection made of plastic, or disposable ones made of paper.
FIG. 4 shows an example of a disposable paper-made cylindrical mouthpiece. This is most often used because it is easy to use and inexpensive. However, the present invention is not limited to paper.
The size of the mouthpiece is usually about 25 mm in diameter (several centimeters in length) based on the flowmeter standard.

In the examination, the mouthpiece 42 is chewed with teeth and added to the mouth, and designated breathing is performed. When the mouthpiece is chewed with teeth and the force is released, the lips are opened. If breathing is performed as it is, breathing air leaks and accurate measurement cannot be performed. Therefore, efforts are required to close the lips so that breathing air does not leak during the examination. However, since the mouthpiece cross-section and the mouth are different in shape, there is a problem that breathing air leaks during the examination.

Moreover, since the mouthpiece is cylindrical and does not catch when it is held in the mouth, the mouthpiece may pop out of the mouth when calling for maximum effort in the examination. To prevent this, the mouthpiece should be chewed and fixed sufficiently during the examination. At this time, if the bite is bit too strong, the mouthpiece will collapse.
When a person's mouth is opened, a natural closing force is applied. This force increases with the opening of the mouth. This also acts as a force to crush the mouthpiece.
In this way, when inspecting the mouthpiece in addition, the force to bite to fix the mouthpiece so that it does not pop out of the mouth, the force to naturally close when the mouth is opened, and efforts to this When the force generated by the force at the time of calling is applied, and this becomes a certain value or more, the mouthpiece is bitten.
When a paper mouthpiece is wet with saliva, the strength decreases and it tends to collapse. When the mouthpiece is crushed, turbulence occurs and the inspection becomes inaccurate.

In this way, the subject had to perform an examination carefully so as not to leak breathing, to exhale the mouthpiece, and not to chew, which was painful for the subject. .

In order to solve these problems, there is one in which the mouth side of the mouthpiece is flattened (see, for example, Patent Documents 2 and 3).
On the other hand, as shown in FIG. 5B, a filter 44 is increasingly used to prevent infection. Furthermore, recently, a mouse filter as shown in FIG. 7 in which a mouthpiece and a filter are integrated has been widely used (for example, Patent Document 3). The mouse filter has features that it is simple to use and has a high infection prevention effect, compared to a combination of a filter and a mouthpiece as shown in FIG.
The following is described with reference to the drawings.
JP H11-33015 JP2002-204792 Patent No.3259753

FIG. 4 is a perspective view of a conventional mouthpiece. The mouthpiece is cylindrical, has a diameter of about 25 mm, a length of about 70 mm, and is usually made of paper.
This is inexpensive and easy to handle, but as mentioned above, breathing air leaks, the mouthpiece pops out of the mouth, to prevent this, it must be bitten and fixed by teeth, and therefore easily crushed In addition, there has been a problem of requiring efforts from the subject to prevent this.

FIG. 6 is developed to solve the problem of the cylindrical mouthpiece of FIG. 4, and FIG. This mouthpiece is formed into a circular shape sequentially from one end of the paper tube to a flat holding portion and from the holding portion to the circular connecting portion at the other end.

Since the mouthpiece has a flat shape, the mouth opening is less necessary and the mouthpiece is closer to the mouth than the conventional product. For this reason, since it is easy to hold and there are not many gaps between the lips, there is less leakage of breathing air, and the force for crushing the mouthpiece with the opened mouth is reduced, and accurate flow measurement is possible.
However, compared to the cylindrical mouthpiece of FIG. 4 from the direction of the taper, when calling strongly, it is easier to jump out of the mouth, and in order to prevent this, it is necessary to bite more strongly. Moreover, since the shape of the end is flat, the mechanical strength is lower than the cylindrical mouthpiece of FIG.

FIG. 6B shows an example of a mouthpiece disclosed in Patent Document 3. This mouthpiece is formed by squeezing a cylindrical body with two polygonal lines parallel to the generatrix, and is almost the same as in Patent Document 1, so that it is easy to hold, breathing air is difficult to leak, and the subject's effort is reduced. While having the feature, it has a problem that it is easy to chew.

FIG. 7 is an example of a mouse filter shown in the embodiment of Patent Document 1, and is a partial cross-sectional view. The mouth filter is an integrated mouthpiece and filter. It consists of a mouthpiece part (41 in Fig. 7) and a filter part (42 in Figure 7), and a filter medium (43 in Fig. 7) is built in the filter part. is doing. The mouthpiece portion (41 in FIG. 7) has the same shape and dimensions as the conventional mouthpiece in FIG. The mouse filter is tested by connecting the short tube to the respiratory flow meter and adding the long tube to the mouth.

The mouthpiece has the same shape as the mouthpiece shown in FIG. 4, and this part is lightly chewed with a tooth and fixed, and the lips are closed to prevent breathing from leaking. The material of the mouse filter is often plastic, so its strength is higher than that of paper. However, these problems are likely to occur. It has the same problems as the mouthpiece, such as requiring the cooperation and efforts of the subject to prevent this.

The cylindrical mouthpiece of Fig. 4 has the features that the structure is simple, inexpensive and easy to handle, but as mentioned above, breathing air leaks, it is easy to jump out of the mouth when making effort calls, breakage The problem is that it is necessary to cooperate and make efforts of the subject in order to prevent these problems.

The mouthpiece shown in FIG. 6A has a shape close to the mouth structure as compared with the mouthpiece shown in FIG. Further, since the degree of opening the mouth is small, the force for crushing the mouthpiece is smaller than that of the mouthpiece of FIG.
Since there is little air leakage and the mouthpiece is less likely to be deformed, more accurate respiration can be measured.

However, since the holding portion is flat, it is easier to jump out of the mouth when making an effort call than the cylindrical mouthpiece of FIG. 4, and it is necessary to bite with teeth more strongly to prevent this. Since it is flat, its mechanical strength is lower than that of the cylindrical mouthpiece of FIG.
For the subject, the effort to prevent breathing can be reduced, but the effort to prevent it from popping out of the mouth and biting is greater than before.

The mouthpiece of FIG. 6 (B) has the same features and disadvantages as the mouthpiece of FIG. 6 (A).
The mouse filter in Fig. 7 is easy to handle and highly effective in preventing infection, but it is easy to breathe, leaks out of the mouth when making an effort call, and can be damaged by biting. To ask the subject for cooperation and effort.

The present invention further extends the features of the conventional mouthpiece as shown in FIG. 4, the improved mouthpiece as shown in FIG. 6, and the mouse filter as shown in FIG. An object of the present invention is to provide a mouthpiece that is less likely to jump out of the mouth even when an effort call is made, has a high strength against crushing force, and requires less subject cooperation and effort.

In the invention according to claim 1, the diameter is reduced in the vicinity of the distance l from one end of the mouthpiece, and the cross section is expanded from this portion to the end portion.
Further, in the invention according to claim 2, in the mouth filter in which the mouthpiece part (31) and the filter part (32) are integrally formed, the diameter is reduced in the vicinity of the distance l from one end, and from this part to the end part. The cross section expanded as the time went.

In the first aspect of the present invention, the diameter is reduced in the vicinity of the distance l from one end of the mouthpiece, and the cross section is expanded from this portion toward the end.
When the thinned portion is chewed with teeth, the diameter is thicker in the front and rear than this portion, so that the lips hit this portion and can be blocked with little effort to prevent breathing. Since the diameter of the front and rear of the portion chewed by the teeth is large, the mouthpiece does not jump out of the mouth even if the effort call is made strongly. For this reason, the biting force for fixing the mouthpiece is small. In addition, since the degree of opening the mouth is small, the force to naturally close the mouth on the mouthpiece is small. And since the shape of the cross section of an edge part is circular, intensity | strength is high with respect to the crushing force. Thus, since the force which bites a mouthpiece is small and mechanical strength is also high, it is hard to be crushed.
The effort to close the lips so that the breath does not leak, the effort to prevent the mouthpiece from popping out of the mouth, and the effort not to bite are all small, so there is little extra effort for the subject. .

Further, in the invention according to claim 2, in the mouth filter in which the mouthpiece part (31) and the filter part (32) are integrally formed, the diameter is reduced in the vicinity of the distance l from one end, and from this part to the end part. The cross section expanded as the time went.
Therefore, like the mouthpiece of claim 1, it is easy to hold, easy to close so that air does not leak through the lips, the mouthpiece is difficult to jump out of the mouth, hard to collapse, and the subject's extra effort can be reduced, etc. Has features. Moreover, since the mouthpiece and the filter are integrated, it does not take time to assemble it for each inspection, and the infection prevention effect is high.

In the first aspect of the present invention, the diameter is reduced in the vicinity of the distance l from one end of the mouthpiece, and the cross section expands from this portion toward the end.
When the thinned part is added with teeth, the lip hits the thickened part in front of it, so that the lip can be easily closed so that there is no leakage of breathing air. That means less effort to keep you from breathing.

Also, since the front and back of the thinned part are thick, if you bite the thin part lightly with your teeth, the mouthpiece will not move back and forth, and even if you call for effort, the mouthpiece will not jump out of the mouth .
Since the degree of opening the mouth is small, the force to naturally close the mouth on the mouthpiece is small.
For this reason, the total force acting to crush the mouthpiece is reduced.
In addition, since the shape of the end portion of the mouthpiece is circular, the mechanical strength against the crushing force is higher than that of a flat end portion as shown in FIG.
For the test subjects, less attention and effort is required to prevent breathing, to prevent the mouthpiece from popping out of the mouth, and not to crush the mouthpiece. That's it.

In the invention according to claim 2, in the mouth filter in which the mouthpiece portion (31) and the filter portion (32) are integrally formed, the diameter is reduced in the vicinity of the distance l from one end, as in the invention according to claim 1. The cross-section is expanded from this part to the end.
When the thinned part is added with teeth, the lip hits the thickened part in front of it, so that the lip can be easily closed so that there is no leakage of breathing air.
Also, since the front and back of the thinned part are thick, if you bite the thin part lightly with your teeth, the mouthpiece will not move back and forth, and even if you call for effort, the mouthpiece will not jump out of the mouth .

Not only does it require less force to bite the mouthpiece, but there is also little opening of the mouth, so the force to naturally close the mouth on the mouthpiece is reduced.
For this reason, the force which acts to crush the mouthpiece is reduced.
In addition, since the shape of the end portion of the mouthpiece is circular, the mechanical strength against the crushing force is higher than that of a flat end portion as shown in FIG.
The degree of cooperation and effort of the subject can be reduced because less attention and effort is required to prevent the mouthpiece from popping out of the mouth and not to crush the mouthpiece so that breathing air does not leak.

An embodiment of the invention described in claim 1 is shown in FIG. 1A is a side view of the mouthpiece according to the present invention, and FIG. 1B is a front view thereof. In this mouthpiece, the diameter of the portion whose distance from the end of the cylinder 1 is l is reduced, and the cross section is sequentially circular from this portion to both ends of the cylinder.

Put this in your mouth, bite the narrowed part with your teeth, and close your lips so that you don't leak. Since the portion closed by the lips is larger in diameter than the portion chewed by the teeth, the effort to close the lips so as not to leak breathing can be reduced.
In addition, since the diameter of the thinned portion is large before and after the mouthpiece, if the mouthpiece is lightly chewed, the mouthpiece does not move back and forth, and the mouthpiece does not jump out of the mouth even when calling for effort.

In this way, the force to bite the mouthpiece is small.
On the other hand, when the mouth is opened, the mouth tries to close naturally by the power of the muscles. This force depends on how much you open your mouth. Since the mouthpiece according to the present invention has a small tooth-engaging portion, this force is small.
For this reason, the force which acts so that the mouthpiece which synthesize | combined these will be crushed becomes small.
In addition, since the shape of the end portion of the mouthpiece is circular, the mechanical strength against the crushing force is higher than that of a flat end portion as shown in FIG.
The degree of cooperation and effort of the subject can be reduced because less attention and effort is required to prevent the mouthpiece from popping out of the mouth and not to crush the mouthpiece so that breathing air does not leak.

FIG. 2 shows another embodiment of the present invention.
2A to 2D are examples of a cross section at a distance l from the end.
In FIG. 2A, the shape of the cross section at a distance of 1 from the end portion is a square smaller than the circle at the end portion, and the cross section gradually expands in a circular shape from this portion toward both end portions.
The mouthpiece of this embodiment has the same effect as that of the embodiment of FIG. 1, but the cross-sectional shape of the thinned portion is a quadrangle. Therefore, the mouthpiece is more resistant to crushing force than the embodiment of FIG. High strength.
Fig. 2 (B) shows the shape of the cross section at a distance of l from the end as an octagon, and Fig. 2 (C) shows a shape formed by crushing with two broken lines parallel to the generatrix. It is an oval shape.
Examples close to the shape of the mouth are the embodiments of (C) and (D), which can reduce the leakage of breathing air from the mouth and reduce the effort.

(E) to (H) of FIG. 2 show another embodiment relating to the shape of the side surface in the longitudinal direction according to the first aspect of the present invention.
(E) is the position of the distance l from the end, the diameter of the mouthpiece is abruptly decreased, and the diameter is gradually increased toward the opposite end. The effects of the present embodiment are the same as those of the embodiment of FIG. 1, such as preventing breathing leaks, fixing the mouthpiece by lightly biting, being hard to be crushed, and requiring less effort by the subject. However, since a turbulent flow is generated at a discontinuous portion of the diameter, it is necessary to design the size and shape in consideration of this. This is the same in all other embodiments.
(F) is a triangular taper in the length direction of the mouthpiece. (E) is also a type of triangle. The shape does not matter.
(G) is an example of molding into a bellows shape, and (H) is one in which a depression is processed at one place. (G) and (H) can be regarded as the same embodiment.

The present invention
Make breathing difficult to leak,
The mouthpiece can be fixed just by chewing lightly so that it does not pop out of the mouth even when forced to call.
Make it hard to collapse,
Preferably, the shape of the part closed by the lips is made close to the shape of the mouth so that breathing air is difficult to leak.
It solves one or more of these issues.
This embodiment is shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, but any shape is possible as long as this idea is realized.
For example, a small concave portion may be provided only at a site where the upper tooth hits. If this is chewed lightly, the mouthpiece can be fixed and the mouthpiece can be fixed, and it can be prevented from popping out of the mouth at the time of calling. However, the effort of the subject required to close the lips and prevent the leakage of breathing air is similar to that of the conventional mouthpiece of FIG.

FIG. 3 shows an embodiment of the invention described in claim 2. In the figure, 31 is a mouthpiece portion, and 32 is a filter portion. A filter medium for filtering saliva, wrinkles and the like is accommodated in the filter portion 32. r is the diameter of the mouthpiece. In the embodiment, the diameter of the portion of the distance l from the end of the mouthpiece portion 31 is set to a.
The aperture is the same as in FIG.
Connect this mouse filter to the respiratory flow meter, bite lightly with your teeth at the part with the diameter reduced to a, close the front (filter side) with your lips to prevent breathing, and perform predetermined breathing. Perform a functional test.

Since the portion closed by the lips is larger in diameter than the portion chewed by the teeth, the effort to close the lips so as not to leak breathing can be reduced.
Also, since the diameter of the thinned part is large at the front and back, if you bite the thin part lightly with your teeth, the mouthpiece will not move back and forth, and even if you call for effort, the mouthpiece will jump out of the mouth There is no.
In this way, the force to bite the mouthpiece is small.

For this reason, the force which acts to crush the mouthpiece which integrated these becomes small.
In addition, since the shape of the end portion of the mouthpiece is circular, the mechanical strength against the crushing force is higher than that of a flat end portion as shown in FIG.

In this way, the degree of cooperation and effort of the subject is small because less attention and effort is required to prevent the mouthpiece from leaking out of the mouth and to prevent the mouthpiece from being crushed so as not to leak. I'll do it.

The invention described in this claim can be fixed so that the mouthpiece does not jump out of the mouth just by chewing lightly with teeth, making it difficult to leak breathing, making it difficult to collapse, and reducing the cooperation and effort of the subject. As long as it solves one or more of the techniques, the cross section of the mouthpiece part of the mouth filter and the shape in the length direction are not limited. In the invention described in this claim, the embodiment described in the invention described in claim 1 may be performed on the mouthpiece portion.

An embodiment of the invention according to claim 1. 4 is another embodiment of the invention as set forth in claim 1; An embodiment of the invention described in claim 2. It is an example of the conventional cylindrical mouthpiece. It is a figure of sensors used in a respiratory function test. (A) is a diagram in which a mouthpiece is combined with a flow sensor, and (B) is a diagram in which a filter and a mouthpiece are used in combination with a flow sensor. (A) is described in Patent Document 1, and (B) is a mouthpiece described in Patent Document 2. 3 is a mouse filter described in Patent Document 3.

Explanation of symbols

l: Distance from the end of the mouthpiece to the processed part r: Diameter of the end of the mouthpiece
a: Diameter of the mouthpiece of the processed part
31: Mouthpiece part of the mouse filter
32: Filter part of the mouse filter
L: Length of mouthpiece

Claims (2)

  A mouthpiece in which the diameter is reduced in the vicinity of the distance l from one end, and the cross section is expanded from this part to the end. In the mouth filter in which the mouthpiece part (31) and the filter part (32) are integrally formed, the diameter is reduced in the vicinity of the distance l from one end, and the cross section is expanded from this part to the end part. Mouse filter.

Images