Henry T Peng1, Erin Savage2, Oshin Vartanian1, Shane Smith2, Shawn G Rhind1, Catherine Tenn3, Stephen Bjamason3. 1. Defence Research and Development Canada, Toronto Research Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Canadian Forces Health Services, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 3. Defence Research and Development Canada, Suffield Research Centre, Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A convenient biosensor for real-time measurement of biomarkers for in-field psychophysiological stress research and military operations is desirable. We evaluated a hand-held device for measuring salivary amylase as a stress marker in medical technicians undergoing combat casualty care training using two different modalities in operating room and field settings. METHODS: Salivary amylase activity was measured by two biosensor methods: directly sampling saliva with a test strip placed under the tongue or pipetting a fixed volume of precollected saliva onto the test strip, followed by analyzing the sample on the strip using a biosensor. The two methods were compared for their accuracy and sensitivity to detect the stress response using an enzyme assay method as a standard. RESULTS: The measurements from the under-the-tongue method were not as consistent with those from the standard assay method as the values obtained from the pipetting method. The under-the-tongue method did not detect any significant increase in the amylase activity due to stress in the operating room (P > 0.1), in contrast to the significant increases observed using the pipetting method and assay method with a significance level less than 0.05 and 0.1, respectively. Furthermore, the under-the-tongue method showed no increased amylase activity in the field testing, while both the pipetting method and assay method showed increased amylase activity in the same group (P < 0.1). CONCLUSION: The accuracy and consistency of the biosensors need to be improved when used to directly measure salivary amylase activity under the tongue for stress assessment in military medical training.
BACKGROUND: A convenient biosensor for real-time measurement of biomarkers for in-field psychophysiological stress research and military operations is desirable. We evaluated a hand-held device for measuring salivary amylase as a stress marker in medical technicians undergoing combat casualty care training using two different modalities in operating room and field settings. METHODS: Salivary amylase activity was measured by two biosensor methods: directly sampling saliva with a test strip placed under the tongue or pipetting a fixed volume of precollected saliva onto the test strip, followed by analyzing the sample on the strip using a biosensor. The two methods were compared for their accuracy and sensitivity to detect the stress response using an enzyme assay method as a standard. RESULTS: The measurements from the under-the-tongue method were not as consistent with those from the standard assay method as the values obtained from the pipetting method. The under-the-tongue method did not detect any significant increase in the amylase activity due to stress in the operating room (P > 0.1), in contrast to the significant increases observed using the pipetting method and assay method with a significance level less than 0.05 and 0.1, respectively. Furthermore, the under-the-tongue method showed no increased amylase activity in the field testing, while both the pipetting method and assay method showed increased amylase activity in the same group (P < 0.1). CONCLUSION: The accuracy and consistency of the biosensors need to be improved when used to directly measure salivary amylase activity under the tongue for stress assessment in military medical training.
Authors: Marcus K Taylor; Kenneth P Sausen; Lilianne R Mujica-Parodi; Eric G Potterat; Matthew A Yanagi; Hyung Kim Journal: Aviat Space Environ Med Date: 2007-05
Authors: Douglas A Granger; Katie T Kivlighan; Mona el-Sheikh; Elana B Gordis; Laura R Stroud Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2007-03-01 Impact factor: 5.691
Authors: Melba C Stetz; Maria L Thomas; Michael B Russo; Thomas A Stetz; Robert M Wildzunas; Joshua J McDonald; Brenda K Wiederhold; James A Romano Journal: Aviat Space Environ Med Date: 2007-05
Authors: Marta Vicente-Rodríguez; Damián Iglesias Gallego; Juan Pedro Fuentes-García; Vicente Javier Clemente-Suárez Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 3.576