Why the study?
The study aimed to develop and validate a cuffless method for continuous blood pressure measurement using a wearable device based on the time-delay method.
Does a cuffless wearable device using a time-delay method accurately estimate continuous blood pressure compared to a certified digital sphygmomanometer?
Does a cuffless wearable device using a time-delay method accurately estimate continuous blood pressure compared to a certified digital sphygmomanometer?
A novel cuffless wearable device using a time-delay method provides continuous blood pressure estimates with acceptable accuracy compared to standard oscillometric devices.
Supports cuffless BP device development; leaves open need for larger validation trials before clinical use.
The present study aims to develop and validate a cuffless method for blood pressure continuous measurement through a wearable device. The goal is achieved according to the time-delay method, with the guiding principle of the time relation it takes for a blood volume to travel from the heart to a peripheral site. Inversely proportional to the blood pressure, this time relation is obtained as the time occurring between the R peak of the electrocardiographic signal and a marker point on the photoplethysmographic wave. Such physiological signals are recorded by using L.I.F.E. Italia's wearable device, made of a sensorized shirt and wristband. A linear regression model is implemented to estimate the corresponding blood pressure variations from the obtained time-delay and other features of the photoplethysmographic wave. Then, according to the international standards, the model performance is assessed, comparing the estimates with the measurements provided by a certified digital sphygmomanometer. According to the standards, the results obtained during this study are notable, with 85% of the errors lower than 10 mmHg and a mean absolute error lower than 7 mmHg. In conclusion, this study suggests a time-delay method for continuous blood pressure estimates with good performance, compared with a reference device based on the oscillometric technique.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marchi et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: