What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Observational. Population: Healthy subjects (n=5). Intervention: Variable probe contact pressure vs. Optimal contact pressure. Primary outcome: PPG pulse wave 2nd derivative parameter b/a.

What does this research mean for the field?

Arterial stiffness estimated from the photoplethysmography (PPG) pulse wave parameter b/a exhibits >300% variation at nonoptimal probe contact pressures, but demonstrates high repeatability (CV <5%) at optimal contact pressure. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.NOVEL_FINDING. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

February 1, 2013Open Access

Effect of probe contact pressure on the photoplethysmographic assessment of conduit artery stiffness

Q: What are the key findings of this study?

Arterial stiffness estimated from the PPG pulse wave parameter b/a showed >300% variation at nonoptimal probe contact pressures, compared to high repeatability (CV <5%) at optimal contact pressure.

Key Result

Arterial stiffness estimated from the PPG pulse wave parameter b/a showed >300% variation at nonoptimal probe contact pressures, compared to high repeatability (CV <5%) at optimal contact pressure.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=5)

Structured PICO

Does optimal probe contact pressure improve the repeatability of arterial stiffness estimation using photoplethysmography in healthy subjects?

Population

5 healthy subjects

Intervention

Photoplethysmography (PPG) recordings from conduit artery sites at variable probe contact pressure (0 to 15 kPa) using 880 nm reflectance type sensor

Comparator

Optimal contact pressure derived from PPG alternating current (AC) signal pulse area

Outcome

Arterial stiffness estimated from PPG pulse wave 2nd derivative parameter b/asurrogate

Optimal probe contact pressure is crucial for reliable and repeatable estimation of arterial stiffness using photoplethysmography.

Abstract

Currently, photoplethysmography (PPG) is a frequently studied optical blood pulsation detection technique among biophotonic and biomedical researchers due to the fact that it shows high potential for estimating the arterial stiffness (AS). The extraction of diagnostically useful information requires standardized measurement procedure with good repeatability. However, the effects of a crucially important factor-the optimal contact pressure (CP) of the probe-are often ignored. Also, CP values are not reported to evaluate those effects. It is hypothesized that AS estimated from PPG pulse wave 2nd derivative parameter b/a is strongly inconsistent when recorded at nonoptimal probe CP. Our pilot study confirmed this during in vivo PPG recordings from conduit artery sites on five healthy subjects at variable probe CP (0 to 15 kPa) by using 880 nm reflectance type sensor, force transducer, and PPG alternating current (AC) signal pulse area derived optimal CP criterion. The b/a values, calculated from PPG with variable CP, showed variation >300 percent. In contrast, at the optimal CP, the b/a showed high repeatability (coefficient of variability <5 percent). The effect has been explained with exponential pulse pressure-volume relationship model which indicates the optimal CP range.

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Grabovskis et al. (Fri,) conducted a observational in Healthy subjects (n=5). Variable probe contact pressure vs. Optimal contact pressure was evaluated on PPG pulse wave 2nd derivative parameter b/a. Arterial stiffness estimated from the PPG pulse wave parameter b/a showed >300% variation at nonoptimal probe contact pressures, compared to high repeatability (CV <5%) at optimal contact pressure.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a180d7256b3e2ada412e017 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jbo.18.2.027004

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: