| Literature DB >> 22574033 |
Devis Dei1, Gilberto Grazzini, Guido Luzi, Massimiliano Pieraccini, Carlo Atzeni, Sergio Boncinelli, Gianna Camiciottoli, Walter Castellani, Massimo Marsili, Juri Lo Dico.
Abstract
In this paper the use of a continuous-wave microwave sensor as a non-contact tool for quantitative measurement of respiratory tidal volume has been evaluated by experimentation in seventeen healthy volunteers. The sensor working principle is reported and several causes that can affect its response are analyzed. A suitable data processing has been devised able to reject the majority of breath measurements taken under non suitable conditions. Furthermore, a relationship between microwave sensor measurements and volume inspired and expired at quiet breathing (tidal volume) has been found.Entities:
Keywords: Microwave sensor; respiratory movement; tidal volume; vital signs
Year: 2009 PMID: 22574033 PMCID: PMC3348806 DOI: 10.3390/s90402574
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.Phasor trace in I–Q plane due to static clutter and a rigid shift of a scatterer.
Figure 2.Phasor traces of the simulated signal due to two scatterers at distance 1.02 m and 0.99 m, with a sinusoidal motion with 6mm and 4 mm peak-to-peak amplitude respectively. (a) oscillation at 0.25 Hz movement have a phase shift of π/3. (b) oscillation frequencies are 0.25 Hz e 0.30 Hz respectively.
Figure 3.Representation of the dispersion of the measured phasor trace: ΔM is the dispersion along the radial direction of the circumference; Δφ is the dispersion along the angle under the arc of circumference.
Series of parameters associated to the experimental sample.
| 1 | M | 47 | 67 | 176 | 97 |
| 2 | M | 76 | 66 | 171 | 91 |
| 3 | M | 27 | 70 | 168 | 95 |
| 4 | M | 27 | 80 | 173 | 99 |
| 5 | M | 31 | 80 | 175 | 106 |
| 6 | M | 70 | 78 | 169 | 103 |
| 7 | F | 62 | 54 | 150 | 99 |
| 8 | F | 30 | 68 | 174 | 90 |
| 9 | F | 28 | 54 | 160 | 79 |
| 10 | F | 28 | 62 | 170 | 82 |
| 11 | F | 30 | 60 | 170 | 83 |
| 12 | F | 30 | 56 | 168 | 84 |
| 13 | M | 64 | 78 | 172 | 108 |
| 14 | M | 24 | 71 | 175 | 96 |
| 15 | F | 28 | 55 | 160 | 86 |
| 16 | F | 28 | 49 | 160 | 80 |
| 17 | F | 29 | 64 | 171 | 92 |
Figure 4.Sketch of the measurement set-up.
Figure 5.Experimental results in I–Q plane. Examples of two extreme cases: (a) valid data with D = 23.57; (b) discarded data with D = 3.89.
Subdivision of volunteers based on quality index.
| 0 | 2 | 5 | |
| 1 | 0 | ||
| 2 | 2 | ||
| 3 | 1 | ||
| 4 | 2 | 12 | |
| 5 | 2 | ||
| 6 | 8 | ||
Figure 6.Displacements measured by the microwave sensor as a function of the volumes measured through the spirometer for one data set. Solid line represents the calculated linear regression.
Constant of proportionality and coefficient of determination for every volunteer.
| 1 | 89.24 | 0.967 |
| 2 | 56.07 | 0.955 |
| 3 | 51.34 | 0.917 |
| 4 | 136.53 | 0.977 |
| 5 | 76.22 | 0.949 |
| 7 | 74.03 | 0.968 |
| 8 | 64.05 | 0.955 |
| 10 | 167.96 | 0.976 |
| 12 | 113.51 | 0.980 |
| 14 | 88.99 | 0.936 |
| 15 | 81.33 | 0.984 |
| 17 | 107.56 | 0.987 |
Figure 7.Volume variation measured by spirometer and by microwave sensor after calibration, as a function of time, for a single data set.
Figure 8.Differences versus average for tidal volumes measured with two different methods: (a) mean and 95% limits of agreement considering uniform dispersion; (b) mean and 95% limits of agreement with regression approach.