| Literature DB >> 32449051 |
Gurpreet Singh1, Augustine Tee2, Thanawin Trakoolwilaiwan3, Aza Taha2, Malini Olivo3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An efficient and accurate method of respiratory rate measurement is still missing in hospital general wards and triage. The goal of this study is to propose a method of respiratory rate measurement that has a potential to be used in general wards, triage, and different hospital settings with comparable performance. We propose a method of respiratory rate measurement that combines a unique wearable platform with an adaptive and optical approach. The optical approach is based on a direct-contact optical diffuse reflectance phenomenon. An adaptive algorithm is developed that computes the first respiratory rate and uses it to select a band. The band then chooses a set of unique optimized parameters in the algorithm to calculate and improve the respiratory rate. We developed a study to compare the proposed method against reference manual counts from 82 patients diagnosed with respiratory diseases.Entities:
Keywords: Automated; Breathing pattern; General wards; Manual counts; Respiratory rate; Technology
Year: 2020 PMID: 32449051 PMCID: PMC7246231 DOI: 10.1186/s40635-020-00302-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Intensive Care Med Exp ISSN: 2197-425X
Fig. 1Optical diffuse reflectance approach that is used to extract respiratory rate from the diffused collected signal
Fig. 2a Wearable sensor and patch, b side view use of the wearable platform, and c front-view use of the wearable platform
Fig. 3Plots of a signal from photo-sensor. b Fourier transform showing 1st harmonic that is respiratory rate and the multiple higher-order harmonics
Demographics of study
| Characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Male sex (of the 82 included), | 45 (54.9%) |
| Age, year (of the 82 included), mean (SD) | 53.7 (16.7) |
| Patient type (total) | |
| Total recruited | 100 |
| Corrupted data | 4 |
| With all manual counts interrupted | 14 |
| With all manual counts non-interrupted | 64 |
| With at least one manual count non-interrupted | 82 |
| Diagnosis (of the 82 included) | |
| COPD | 14 |
| COPD and asthma | 5 |
| Asthma | 31 |
| Pneumonia | 32 |
Fig. 4Box plot of deviations between the proposed method of respiratory rate measurement and manual counts, across 4 cases (see Table 2)
Table highlighting bias, standard deviation, and 95% confidence intervals for the different test cases
| Case | Manual count type | Signal processing type | Bias | STD | 95% C.I. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Exclude interrupts | Normal | 0.16 | 2.38 | (− 3.88, 4.40) |
| 2 | Exclude interrupts | Adaptive sub-banding | − 0.12 | 2.34 | (− 3.48, 3.40) |
| 3 | Include interrupts | Normal | 0.17 | 2.71 | (− 3.78, 5.08) |
| 4 | Include interrupts | Adaptive sub-banding | 0.05 | 2.56 | (− 3.34, 3.67) |
Fig. 5Bland-Altman plots of a case 3 (no “sub-banding”) and b case 4 (with “sub-banding”)
Fig. 6Box plot of deviations between the proposed method of respiratory rate measurement and manual counts for case 4 (see Table 2) and across 2 different age groups
Table comparing the performance of other respiratory rate devices reported in literature and the proposed method of respiratory rate measurement
| Device | Bias | STD | 95% C.I. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Medtronic Nellcor Pulse Oximetry [ | 0.07 | 1.99 | (− 3.84, 3.97) |
| Masimo RRa [ | 0 | 1.0 | (− 1.9, 1.9) |
| Nihon impedance pneumography [ | 0.4 | 5.9 | (− 11.1, 11.9) |
| Proposed method | 0.05 | 2.56 | (− 3.34, 3.67) |
Bias, standard deviation, and 95% confidence interval are all in bpm