| Literature DB >> 34883780 |
Martin Clinton Tosima Manullang1,2, Yuan-Hsiang Lin1, Sheng-Jie Lai1, Nai-Kuan Chou3.
Abstract
Non-contact physiological measurements based on image sensors have developed rapidly in recent years. Among them, thermal cameras have the advantage of measuring temperature in the environment without light and have potential to develop physiological measurement applications. Various studies have used thermal camera to measure the physiological signals such as respiratory rate, heart rate, and body temperature. In this paper, we provided a general overview of the existing studies by examining the physiological signals of measurement, the used platforms, the thermal camera models and specifications, the use of camera fusion, the image and signal processing step (including the algorithms and tools used), and the performance evaluation. The advantages and challenges of thermal camera-based physiological measurement were also discussed. Several suggestions and prospects such as healthcare applications, machine learning, multi-parameter, and image fusion, have been proposed to improve the physiological measurement of thermal camera in the future.Entities:
Keywords: contactless sensors; non-contact; physiological measurement; thermal camera
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34883780 PMCID: PMC8659982 DOI: 10.3390/s21237777
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Existing Systematic review.
| Author | Published Year | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| Mikulska D. [ | 2006 | Covered studies before 2006 |
| Lahiri et al. [ | 2012 | Published in 2012 and covered studies before 2012 |
| El et al. [ | 2015 | Only covered applications related to sports |
| Znamenskaya et al. [ | 2016 | Limited to human psychophysiological conditions that are based on thermographic video |
| Zadeh et al. [ | 2016 | Only covered breast cancer diagnostics by using thermal imaging |
| Moreira et al. [ | 2017 | Developed checklist guidelines to assess skin temperature for sports and exercise medicine |
| Topalidou et al. [ | 2019 | Database limited to EMBASE, MEDLINE, and MIDIRS and only covered thermal camera usage in neonatal care |
| Pan et al. [ | 2019 | Focused on vein finder by using near infrared (NIR) |
| Aggarwal et al. [ | 2020 | Focused on reviewing the accuracy of handheld thermal cameras |
| Foster et al. [ | 2021 | Focused on assessing human core temperature using infrared thermometry |
| He et al. [ | 2021 | Not focused on human vital signs |
Figure 1The general process stages of studies using a thermal camera that performs physiological measurements. Several stages are depicted by dotted line boxes explaining that these stages only apply in certain studies in general.
List of Thermal Cameras Used in Some Studies in this Systematic Review Along with The Specifications Used.
| Manufacturer | Model | Spectral Range | Temperature Accuracy | Thermal Sensitivity (NETD) | Maximum FPS and Resolutions | Used by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flir Systems Inc., Wilsonville, OR, USA | Lepton 3.5 | 8 to 14 µm | ±5 °C | <50 mK | 8.7 FPS, 160 × 120 pixels | [ |
| A325 | 7 to 13.5 µm | ±5 °C | <50 mK | 60 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | [ | |
| Thermovision A40M | 7 to 13.5 µm | ±2 °C | <50 mK | 60 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | [ | |
| A315 | 7.5 to 13 µm | ±2 °C | <50 mK | 60 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | [ | |
| P384-20 | 8 to 14 µm | ±2 °C | <50 mK | 50 FPS, 384 × 288 pixels | [ | |
| T430sc | 7.5 to 13 µm | ±2 °C | <30 mK | 12 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | [ | |
| InfraTec GmbH, Dresden, Germany | VarioCAMR HD 820S | 7.5 to 14 µm | ±1 °C | <55 mK | 30 FPS, 1024 × 768 pixels | [ |
| Magnity Electronics Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China | MAG 62 | 7.5 to 14 µm | ±2 °C | <60 mK | 50 FPS, 640 × 480 pixels | [ |
| Optris Gmbh, Berlin, Germany | Optris PI 450i | 8 to 14 µm | ±2 °C | <75 mK | 80 FPS, 382 × 288 pixels | [ |
| Seek Thermal Inc., Santa Barbara, CA, USA | Compact PRO | 7.5 to 14 µm | - | <70 mK | >15 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | [ |
| Mobotix AG, Winnweiler, Germany | M16 TR | 7.5 to 13 µm | ±10 °C | <50 mK | 9 FPS, 336 × 252 pixels | [ |
Figure 2An overview of how RGB cameras are used to assist thermal cameras in determining ROI and the transformation process.
Summary of Thermal Camera Usage Related to Respiratory.
| Author | Objectives | Thermal Camera Model, FPS, and Dimension Used | Image and Signal Processing Tools | Algorithm Used | Validation Method | Performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chen et al. [ | RR measurement | MAG 62, 10 FPS, 640 × 480 pixels | ·Open CV: Image Processing Tools | ·KLT: Coordinate Mapping | Compared with the GY-6620 sleep monitor | ·Root Mean Square Error: 0.71 breaths/min and 0.76 breaths/min |
| Goldman et al. [ | RR measurement | Thermovision A40, 50FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | ·Matlab for signal processing software | ·n/a | Compared with standard measurements of nasal pressure | ·Intraclass correlation of 0.978 (0.991–0.954 95% CI) |
| Hu et al. [ | RR measurement | MAG 62, 640 × 480 pixels | ·All analysis conducted with Matlab R2014A | ·Viola-Jones Algorithm for Cascade Object Detector | Compared with human observers (manual counting) | ·Accuracy for face, nose, and mouth: 98.46%, 95.38%, 84.62% |
| Hu, et al. [ | RR and HR measurement | MAG 62, 30 FPS, 640 × 480 pixels | ·Matlab R2014a for Image Processing | ·Affine Transformation for transforming images | Compared with human observers (manual counting) | ·Determination Coefficient: 0.831 |
| Jagadev et al. [ | RR measurement | Flir A325, 25 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | ·k-nearest neighbors (k-NN) Classifier | Statistical calculation of sensitivity, precision, spurious cycle rate, missed cycle rate | ·Sensitivity: 98.76% | |
| Jagadev et al. [ | RR measurement and classification | Flir A325, 25 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | ·Breath Detection algorithm for counting RR | Statistical calculation of sensitivity, precision, spurious cycle rate, missed cycle rate | ·Sensitivity: 97.2% | |
| Jakkaew et al. [ | RR measurement and body movement detection | Compact PRO, 17 FPS, 640 × 480 pixels | ·minMaxLoc OpenCV: ROI Detection | Compared with Go Direct respiratory belt | ·Root Mean Square Error: 1.82 ± 0.75 bpm | |
| Lyra et al. [ | RR measurement | Optris PI 450i, 4 FPS, 382 × 288 pixels | ·YOLO_mark: Labelling framework | Compared with thoracic bioimpedance based patient monitor device (Philips, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) | ·Intersection over unit (IoU): 0.70 | |
| Mutlu et al. [ | RR measurement | Flir A325, 60 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | ·FLIR ResearchIRMax: Video Recording software | Compared with a respiratory belt transducer containing a piezoelectric | ·Median Error Rate: 6.2% | |
| Negishi et al. [ | RR measurement | Flir A315, 15 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | ·Labview: Image recording and analysis | Compared with a respiratory effort belt (DL-231, S&ME, Japan) | ·Root Mean Square Error: 2.52 RPM | |
| Negishi et al. [ | RR and HR measurement | Flir A315, 15 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | ·Labview: Image recording and analysis | Compared with a respiratory effort belt (DL-231, S&ME, Japan) | ·Root Mean Square Error: 1.13 RPM | |
| Negishi et al. [ | RR and HR measurement | Flir A325, 15 FPS, 320 × 240 pixels | ·dlib: ROI detection library | ·Multiple signal classification (MUSIC) algorithm for signal estimation | Compared with a respiratory effort belt (DL-231, S&ME, Japan) | ·Sensitivity: 85.7% |
| Pereira et al. [ | RR measurement for infants | VarioCAMR HD 820S, 30 FPS, 1024 × 768 pixels | ·Matlab 2017 for Evaluation and Signal Processing software | Compared with thoracic effort | ·Root Mean Square Error: (0.31 ± 0.09) breaths/min. | |
| Scebba et al. [ | RR measurement for apnea detection | NIR: See3cam_CU40 MV, 15 FPS, 336×190 pixels | ·Smart Signal Quality Fusion (S2Fusion) for RR estimation | Compared with piezo-resistive sensors based ezRIP module, Philips Respironics | · Median of Root Mean Square Error: 1.17 breaths/min |
List of Studies Involved Camera Fusion and Its Characteristic.
| Authors | Fusion Camera Combination | Characteristic |
|---|---|---|
| Scebba et al. [ | NIR and LWIR Camera | LWIR camera used for nostrils and chest ROI, NIR camera used for chest ROI |
| Negishi et al. [ | RGB and LWIR Camera | RGB camera used for determining ROI and extracting PPG signals while LWIR camera used for extracting respiratory signal |
| Hu et al. [ | RGB and LWIR Camera | RGB camera used for determining ROI while LWIR camera used for extracting respiratory signal |
| Chen et al. [ | RGB and LWIR Camera | RGB camera used for determining ROI and alternative method to extract respiratory signal if no face detected while LWIR camera sued for extract respiratory signal if any face detected |
Figure 3An overview of how the signal extraction process from a thermal image is carried out. In general, there are two methods: first by measuring changes in temperature in the area around the nostrils and mouth, and second by looking at the movement based on the comparison between changes in pixels in each frame.