Key result
The peak-conditioned fusion algorithm for extracting instantaneous respiratory rate from photoplethysmogram provided a bias of 0.28 bpm with 95% limits of agreement from -3.62 to 4.17 compared to capnography.
Why the study?
Does a peak-conditioned fusion algorithm improve the accuracy of instantaneous respiratory rate extraction from photoplethysmogram compared to single variation estimations?
Observational (n=85)
Yes
Does a peak-conditioned fusion algorithm improve the accuracy of instantaneous respiratory rate extraction from photoplethysmogram compared to single variation estimations?
A novel peak-conditioned fusion algorithm can accurately extract instantaneous respiratory rate from standard pulse oximetry photoplethysmogram signals, potentially expanding the utility of continuous monitoring.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May facilitate respiratory monitoring via standard pulse oximetry; leaves open clinical adoption pending larger validation studies.
In this study, we proposed a novel method for extracting the instantaneous respiratory rate (IRR) from the pulse oximeter photoplethysmogram (PPG). The method was performed in three main steps: 1) a time-frequency transform called synchrosqueezing transform (SST) was used to extract the respiratory-induced intensity, amplitude and frequency variation signals from PPG, 2) the second SST was applied to each extracted respiratory-induced variation signal to estimate the corresponding IRR and 3) the proposed peak-conditioned fusion method then combined the IRR estimates to calculate the final IRR. We validated the implemented method with capnography and nasal/oral airflow as the reference RR using the limits of agreement (LOA) approach. Compared to simple fusion and single respiratory-induced variation estimations, peak-conditioned fusion shows better performance. It provided a bias of 0.28 bpm with the 95% LOAs ranging from -3.62 to 4.17, validated against capnography and a bias of 0.04 bpm with the 95% LOAs ranging from -5.74 to 5.82, validated against nasal/oral airflow. This algorithm would expand the functionality of a conventional pulse oximetry beyond the measurement of heart rate and oxygen saturation to measure the respiratory rate continuously and instantly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dehkordi et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Respiratory rate monitoring (n=85). Peak-conditioned fusion algorithm for extracting instantaneous respiratory rate from photoplethysmogram vs. Capnography and nasal/oral airflow (reference standards) was evaluated on Agreement between estimated instantaneous respiratory rate and reference respiratory rate (bias and 95% limits of agreement) (95% CI -3.62 to 4.17). The peak-conditioned fusion algorithm for extracting instantaneous respiratory rate from photoplethysmogram provided a bias of 0.28 bpm with 95% limits of agreement from -3.62 to 4.17 compared to capnography.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: