Literature DB >> 28429632

Comparison of piezoresistive sensor to PicoPress® in in-vitro interface pressure measurement.

Yung-Wei Chi1, Kuo-Hao Tseng2, Ruya Li2, Tingrui Pan2.   

Abstract

Objective Interface pressure, the sine qua non for compression therapy, is rarely measured in clinical practice and scientific research. The goal of this study aimed to compare and examine the accuracy between a commercially available piezoresistive sensor and PicoPress® (Microlab, Padua, Italy) using the cylinder cuff model to measure in-vitro interface pressure. Method Ten piezoresistive sensors were calibrated using the National Institute of Standard and Technology certified manometer, and compared to PicoPress® using cylinder cuff model from 20 to 120 mmHg. Two statistical analyses were performed: (a) two-sample t-test to compare the front to back surface of the piezoresistive sensors using mean pressure value and (b) one-sample paired t-test to compare the front and back surface of the piezoresistive sensors to PicoPress® and true pressure using mean pressure value. Result There was no difference in interface pressure measurement between the front and back surface of the piezoresistive sensors (P > 0.05). Using mean pressure value, there was no significant difference between the front surface, back surface of the piezoresistive sensors, and PicoPress® (P > 0.05). Standard deviation was larger for the piezoresistive sensors than PicoPress® at any given pressure and this difference was more pronounced in the higher pressure range. Conclusion Piezoresistive sensor may represent a viable alternative to PicoPress® in interface pressure measurement.

Keywords:  Interface pressure; chronic venous disorder; compression therapy; manometry sensor; piezoresistive sensor

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28429632     DOI: 10.1177/0268355517705292

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phlebology        ISSN: 0268-3555            Impact factor:   1.740


  3 in total

1.  Blink-sensing glasses: A flexible iontronic sensing wearable for continuous blink monitoring.

Authors:  Rui Chen; Zhichao Zhang; Ka Deng; Dahu Wang; Hongmin Ke; Li Cai; Chi-Wei Chang; Tingrui Pan
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2021-04-03

2.  Wireless, skin-interfaced sensors for compression therapy.

Authors:  Yoonseok Park; Kyeongha Kwon; Sung Soo Kwak; Da Som Yang; Jean Won Kwak; Haiwen Luan; Ted S Chung; Keum San Chun; Jong Uk Kim; Hokyung Jang; Hanjun Ryu; Hyoyoung Jeong; Sang Min Won; Youn J Kang; Michael Zhang; David Pontes; Brianna R Kampmeier; Seon Hee Seo; Jeffrey Zhao; Inhwa Jung; Yonggang Huang; Shuai Xu; John A Rogers
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 14.136

3.  Study of Three Interface Pressure Measurement Systems Used in the Treatment of Venous Disease.

Authors:  Gayani K Nandasiri; Arash M Shahidi; Tilak Dias
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 3.576

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.