Key result
A novel cuffless optical blood pressure monitoring device using BCG and PPG showed mean differences of 9±5.6 mmHg for systolic and 1.8±1.3 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure versus a reference device.
Why the study?
Does a noninvasive optical blood pressure monitoring device using BCG and PPG accurately measure blood pressure compared to a commercial oscillometric meter?
Does a noninvasive optical blood pressure monitoring device using BCG and PPG accurately measure blood pressure compared to a commercial oscillometric meter?
A novel cuffless, all-optical blood pressure monitoring device using BCG and PPG demonstrated feasibility and may offer an MRI-safe alternative for continuous blood pressure monitoring.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Accuracy limits immediate clinical adoption; hypothesis-generating for cuffless MRI-safe monitoring pending validation.
A new all optical method for long term and continuous blood pressure measurement and monitoring without using cuffs is proposed by using Ballistocardiography (BCG) and Photoplethysmograph (PPG). Based on BCG signal and PPG signal, a time delay between these two signals is obtained to calculate both systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure via linear regression analysis. The fabricated noninvasive blood pressure monitoring device consists of a fiber sensor mat to measure BCG signal and a SpO2 sensor to measure PPG signal. A commercial digital oscillometric blood pressure meter is used to obtain reference values and for calibration. It has been found that by comparing with the reference device, our prototype has typical means and standard deviations of 9+/-5.6 mmHg for systolic blood pressure, 1.8+/-1.3 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure and 0.6+/-0.9 bpm for pulse rate, respectively. If the fiber optic SpO2 probe is used, this new all fiber cuffless noninvasive blood pressure monitoring device will truly be a MRI safe blood pressure measurement and monitoring device.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2013) studied Blood pressure monitoring. Optical Ballistocardiography (BCG) and Photoplethysmograph (PPG) device vs. Commercial digital oscillometric blood pressure meter was evaluated on Accuracy of systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate. A novel cuffless optical blood pressure monitoring device using BCG and PPG showed mean differences of 9±5.6 mmHg for systolic and 1.8±1.3 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure versus a reference device.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: