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.
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.
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.
Dehkordi et al. (Wed,) conducted a 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.