Key result
Fingertip peripheral-pulse method matches impedance cardiography for deriving cardiac PEP in resting men.
Why the study?
Does the fingertip peripheral-pulse method accurately measure cardiac preejection period compared to impedance cardiography in resting male subjects?
Cross-Sectional (n=15)
Does the fingertip peripheral-pulse method accurately measure cardiac preejection period compared to impedance cardiography in resting male subjects?
The fingertip peripheral-pulse method provides a valid and simple noninvasive measure of the cardiac preejection period under resting conditions.
May simplify resting PEP assessment in males; leaves open validation in clinical and dynamic settings.
Traditional noninvasive assessment of sympathetic nervous system (SNS) activity in cardiovascular functioning has been confounded by concurrent parasympathetic influences. Analyses of specific intervals of the cardiac cycle have indicated that the systolic preejection period (PEP) may serve as a reliable index of SNS activity independent of parasympathetic inhibition. In the present study, PEP values derived from a technique employing peripheral pulse wave tracings were compared to values obtained from simultaneous impedance cardiograph recordings. Recordings were made on 15 male subjects who were instructed to rest quietly sitting in an upright position. Results indicated that values obtained from both methods were highly correlated and not significantly different when measurement adjustments on total systole were taken into account. These findings support the validity of the fingertip peripheral-pulse method in obtaining measures of systolic time intervals under resting conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Larkin et al. (1986) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy/Resting (n=15). Fingertip peripheral-pulse method vs. Impedance cardiograph recordings was evaluated on Cardiac preejection period (PEP) values. Fingertip peripheral-pulse method derived preejection period values were highly correlated and not significantly different from simultaneous impedance cardiograph recordings in resting male subjects.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: