| Literature DB >> 35281186 |
N Arunkumar1, V Pandimurugan2, M S Hema3, H Azath2, S Hariharasitaraman2, M Thilagaraj4, Petchinathan Govindan5.
Abstract
In the present medical age, the focus on prevention and prediction is achieved using the medical internet of things. With a broad and complete framework, effective behavioral, environmental, and physiological criteria are necessary to govern the major healthcare sectors. Wearables play an essential role in personal health monitoring data measurement and processing. We wish to design a variable and flexible frame for broad parameter monitoring in accordance with the convenient mode of wearability. In this study, an innovative prototype with a handle and a modular IoT portal is designed for environmental surveillance. The prototype examines the most significant parameters of the surroundings. This strategy allows a bidirectional link between end users and medicine via the IoT gateway as an intermediate portal for users with IoT servers in real time. In addition, the doctor may configure the necessary parameters of measurements via the IoT portal and switch the sensors on the wearables as a real-time observer for the patient. Thus, based on goal analysis, patient situation, specifications, and requests, medications may define setup criteria for calculation. With regard to privacy, power use, and computation delays, we established this system's performance link for three common IoT healthcare circumstances. The simulation results show that this technique may minimize processing time by 25.34%, save energy level up to 72.25%, and boost the privacy level of the IoT medical device to 17.25% compared to the benchmark system.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35281186 PMCID: PMC8906964 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9441357
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1Overview of medical healthcare.
Figure 2Proposed system architecture.
Figure 3Flow model of the proposed architecture.
Transaction time (ms).
| No. of EMRs | Masood et al. | Menaka et al. | Omtosho et al. | Proposed approach |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | 20.43 | 20.13 | 23.50 | 18.54 |
| 200 | 20.63 | 22.50 | 25.67 | 19.02 |
| 300 | 23.18 | 24.02 | 26.33 | 21.78 |
| 400 | 24.50 | 27.43 | 26.92 | 21.50 |
| 500 | 24.34 | 27.24 | 27.00 | 22.33 |
| 600 | 25.47 | 31.72 | 23.50 | 23.00 |
| 700 | 26.33 | 32.33 | 25.67 | 25.93 |
| 800 | 28.78 | 35.77 | 30.38 | 27.33 |
| 900 | 30.01 | 37.00 | 31.81 | 27.89 |
| 1000 | 32.50 | 39.98 | 32.62 | 29.72 |
Figure 4Transmission analysis.
Figure 5Privacy level comparison.
Figure 6Energy consumption comparison.
Figure 7Temperature analysis.
Figure 8Utility comparison.
Figure 9Respiration analysis.
Figure 10IoT data communication efficiency.
Figure 11Performance of the proposed system.
Figure 12Computational latency comparison.
Figure 13QVR comparison.