| Literature DB >> 35047937 |
Syunsuke Yamanaka1, Koji Morikawa2, Hiroshi Morita1, Ji Young Huh3, Osamu Yamamura4.
Abstract
This study presents a new blood pressure (BP) estimation algorithm utilizing machine learning (ML). A cuffless device that can measure BP without calibration would be precious for portability, continuous measurement, and comfortability, but unfortunately, it does not currently exist. Conventional BP measurement with a cuff is standard, but this method has various problems like inaccurate BP measurement, poor portability, and painful cuff pressure. To overcome these disadvantages, many researchers have developed cuffless BP estimation devices. However, these devices are not clinically applicable because they require advanced preparation before use, such as calibration, do not follow international standards (81060-1:2007), or have been designed using insufficient data sets. The present study was conducted to combat these issues. We recruited 127 participants and obtained 878 raw datasets. According to international standards, our diverse data set included participants from different age groups with a wide variety of blood pressures. We utilized ML to formulate a BP estimation method that did not require calibration. The present study also conformed to the method required by international standards while calculating the level of error in BP estimation. Two essential methods were applied in this study: (a) grouping the participants into five subsets based on the relationship between the pulse transit time and systolic BP by a support vector machine ensemble with bagging (b) applying the information from the wavelet transformation of the pulse wave and the electrocardiogram to the linear regression BP estimation model for each group. For systolic BP, the standard deviation of error for the proposed BP estimation results with cross-validation was 7.74 mmHg, which was an improvement from 17.05 mmHg, as estimated by the conventional pulse-transit-time-based methods. For diastolic BP, the standard deviation of error was 6.42 mmHg for the proposed BP estimation, which was an improvement from 14.05mmHg. The purpose of the present study was to demonstrate and evaluate the performance of the newly developed BP estimation ML method that meets the international standard for non-invasive sphygmomanometers in a population with a diverse range of age and BP.Entities:
Keywords: continuous blood pressure; cuffless; electrocardiogram; machine learning; pulse wave; wavelet transformation
Year: 2021 PMID: 35047937 PMCID: PMC8757748 DOI: 10.3389/fmedt.2021.695356
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med Technol ISSN: 2673-3129
Prior non-invasive cuffless blood pressure estimation studies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gao et al. ( | PPG | 65 | 22–65 | W | 5.1 ± 4.3 | 4.6 ± 4.3 |
| Chen et al. ( | BCG | 51 | 20–74 | AS | 9.0 ± 5.6 | 1.8 ± 1.3 |
| Chan et al. ( | ECG | / | / | AS | 7.5 ± 8.8 | 4.1 ± 5.6 |
| Ding et al. ( | PTT | 27 | 21–29 | AS | −0.4 ± 5.2 | −0.1 ± 4.0 |
| Chen et al. ( | PTT | 23/26 | 19–60 | AS | 2.2 ± 6.2 | −1.5 ± 6.5 |
| Poon and Zhan ( | PTT | 85 | / (57 ± 27) | AS | 0.6 ± 9.8 | 0.9 ± 5.6 |
MAE, mean absolute error; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; PPG, photoplethysmogram; ECG, electrocardiogram; PTT, pulse transit time; BCG, ballistocardiograph; AS, analytical solution; SVM, support vector regression machine; W, wavelet.
Figure 1Biopotential sensing system. (A) Biopotential amplification device and data transmitter, (B) First ECG electrical potential electrode, (C) Pulse wave sensor and the second ECG electrical electrode, (D) Receiving dongle, (E) Personal computer for data recording.
Figure 2Protocol for collecting data. We took the measurement using the test device in each participant at least three times.
Blood pressure distribution of participants.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Participant | 85 | 84 |
| Valid data set | 255 | 260 |
| Gender ratio | Each ≥30% | Female 54 (64.3%) |
| SBP ≤ 100 mmHg | ≥13 data/5% | 39 data (15.0%) |
| SBP ≥ 160 mmHg | ≥13 data/5% | 16 data (6.2%) |
| SBP ≥ 140 mmHg | ≥52 data/20% | 52 data (20.0%) |
| DBP ≤ 60 mmHg | ≥13 data/5% | 43 data (16.5%) |
| DBP ≤ 100 mmHg | ≥13 data/5% | 13 data (5.0%) |
| DBP ≤ 85 mmHg | ≥52 data/20% | 71 data (27.3%) |
SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure.
Age distribution of participants.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| 20~24 | 2 (2.4%) |
| 25~29 | 2 (2.4%) |
| 30~34 | 5 (6.0%) |
| 35~39 | 5 (6.0%) |
| 40~44 | 4 (4.8%) |
| 45~49 | 5 (6.0%) |
| 50~54 | 7 (8.3%) |
| 55~59 | 8 (10.0%) |
| 60~64 | 13 (15.5%) |
| 65~69 | 12 (14.3%) |
| 70~74 | 7 (13.0%) |
| 75~79 | 7 (13.0%) |
| 80~84 | 3 (3.6%) |
| 85~ | 4 (4.8%) |
Figure 3Example of normalized ECG and pulse wave. The ECG and the pulse waveforms were averaged to a single waveform in a 10-second window. The pulse intervals were normalized and extended to one second. Normalization was also applied to the amplitude of the wave.
Figure 4Five groups were divided by group estimator in the PTT-reference plot. The participants were distributed 1:1:3:3:2 in the five areas surrounded by the four curves.
Selected feature values.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | - | - | - |
| 2. The square root of body weight | - | - | - |
| 3. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 11 | 7 |
| 4. Wavelet coefficients | ECG | 14 | 3 |
| 5. Bodyweight | - | - | - |
| 6. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 19 | 1 |
| 7. Heart rate | - | - | - |
| 8. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 1 | 2 |
| 9. Wavelet coefficients | ECG | 1 | 2 |
| 10. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 17 | 1 |
| 11. Pulse transit time | - | - | - |
| 12. Wavelet coefficients | ECG | 19 | 2 |
| 13. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 13 | 1 |
| 14. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 14 | 1 |
| 15. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 20 | 1 |
| 16. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 5 | 1 |
| 17. Wavelet coefficients | ECG | 5 | 1 |
| 18. Wavelet coefficients | ECG | 8 | 1 |
| 19. Wavelet coefficients | ECG | 19 | 1 |
| 20. Peak of ECG | ECG | - | - |
| 21. Wavelet coefficients | ECG | 20 | 4 |
| 22. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 10 | 1 |
| 23. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 8 | 1 |
| 24. Wavelet coefficients | Pulse wave | 8 | 2 |
PTT, pulse transit time, ECG, electrocardiogram.
Numbers are assigned in order of the effectiveness of features.
Wavelet coefficients of ECG/pulse wave: The time indicates the number from the beginning of the normalized time axis divided into 20 equal parts. The frequency indicates the number from the beginning of the normalized frequency axis divided into 8 equal parts.
Figure 5Examples of the wavelet transformation of the ECG and pulse waveforms. The ST-segment and the baseline between the T wave and the P wave had frequently used the wavelet coefficient features in both the wavelet coefficients of the ECG and pulse waveforms.
Comparison of conventional PTT-based methods and the proposed method.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| 21.34 mmHg | 14.65 mmHg | |
| PTT-based methods | 17.05 mmHg | 14.05 mmHg |
| Proposed method | 7.74 mmHg | 6.42 mmHg |
BP, blood pressure; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; PTT, pulse transit time.
Measured BP is the overall distribution of the BP data without any data treatment.
Figure 6(A) Proposed method reference-prediction plot (Systolic blood pressure). (B) PTT-based method reference-prediction plot (Systolic blood pressure). The proposed method had small-range prediction values closer to the reference values compared to the PTT-based methods.
Figure 7(A) Proposed method reference-prediction plot (Diastolic blood pressure). (B) PTT-based method reference-prediction plot (Diastolic blood pressure). The proposed method had small-range prediction values closer to the reference values compared to the PTT-based methods.