# Body-region pressure sensitivity

Human page: https://retifist.com/literature-reviews/body-region-pressure-sensitivity

> **Experimental verification in progress.** These planning numbers have not been bench-checked against worn sheet yet. Treat them as working marks, not shop-verified claims.

> **Not medical advice.** Literacy only — not diagnosis or medical compression advice.

## Executive summary

Three maps: Scale **A** acuity/detection (noticeability); Scale **B** PPT (pain ceiling); Scale **C** preferred clothing pressure (garment hoop comfort). Do not average.[^1][^2][^3]

Garment constriction feel: **C** primary, **B** safety on neck/face/chest, **A** for seams/ridges.[^3][^4]

No peer-reviewed fashion NR sheet garment regional clothing-pressure map is in this set. Nearest: textile support-wear / elastic-band studies.[^3][^4]

Fit-planning bridges: [reduction × sensitivity](/literature-reviews/reduction-and-pressure-sensitivity), [pressure targets](/literature-reviews/pattern-reduction-pressure-targets), [Clo3D materials](/literature-reviews/clo3d-material-simulation).

---

## Constructs

| Scale | Construct | Garment use |
| --- | --- | --- |
| A | Acuity / detection | Noticeability |
| B | PPT | Safety ceiling |
| C | Preferred clothing pressure | Relative hoop budgets |

Stroking pleasantness ≠ detection ranking.[^5] Pain vs touch acuity gradients can reverse on hairy limbs.[^1] Mitsuno clothing-pressure rationale includes autonomic/respiratory concerns at neck/abdomen.[^3][^4]

---

## Scale A

Fingertip/face high acuity; proximal limbs/back coarser.[^1][^6][^7] Density ~241/cm² fingertips vs ~13 arms / ~9 trunk.[^8] Detection: forehead/palm 0.07 g median vs thigh/shin 1 g; arm intermediate.[^5]

---

## Scale B

Nape PPT ~0.55× lumbosacral; shoulder ~0.85× (Kosek sample).[^2] Forehead/sternum lower PPT than many limb joints (Tomschi).[^9] DFNS region/age/sex-specific; women often lower PPT.[^10][^11]

---

## Scale C

Preferred pressure: limbs > neck/abdomen; increases toward extremities; ventral waist low; waistband couples to respiration.[^3][^4][^12] Torso abstract: anterior waist/underbust among the lowest Pa (ordinal only).[^13]

Draft multipliers (arm=1.0) are planning bands — not latex-wear validated.[^14]

---

## Decision cues

- Ridge noticeability → A
- Collar/hood → C + B
- Panel tension budget → C
- Feels-like formula *P*_feels = *P*_target / *m*_C is planning synthesis (sibling review), not a Mitsuno/DFNS result.[^15]

---

## Endnotes

[^1]: Mancini et al., *Ann Neurol* (2014) — doi:10.1002/ana.24179.
[^2]: Kosek et al., *Scand J Rehabil Med* (1993).
[^3]: Mitsuno & Kai, *Text Res J* (2019) — doi:10.1177/0040517518786272 (abstract).
[^4]: Mitsuno, *JTEFT* (2023) — doi:10.15406/jteft.2023.09.00339.
[^5]: Ackerley et al., *Front Behav Neurosci* (2014) — doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00054.
[^6]: Weinstein (1968) via OA secondaries.
[^7]: Tong et al., *Front Hum Neurosci* (2013) — doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00579.
[^8]: Corniani & Saal, *J Neurophysiol* (2020) — doi:10.1152/jn.00313.2020.
[^9]: Tomschi et al., *Eur J Pain* (2025) — doi:10.1002/ejp.70068.
[^10]: Rolke et al., *Pain* (2006) — doi:10.1016/j.pain.2006.01.041.
[^11]: Magerl 2010; Chesterton 2003; Neziri 2011 — age/sex modulators.
[^12]: Mitsuno & Ueda, *Sen'i Gakkaishi* (2010) — doi:10.2115/fiber.66.26.
[^13]: Female garment comfort-threshold abstract — ordinal Pa.
[^14]: Internal draft multiplier bands (arm = 1.0); not latex-wear validated.
[^15]: [reduction-and-pressure-sensitivity](/literature-reviews/reduction-and-pressure-sensitivity); [pattern-reduction-pressure-targets](/literature-reviews/pattern-reduction-pressure-targets).