Key result
Low-cost piezoelectric ceramic sensor matches commercial devices for accurate continuous heart rate monitoring.
Why the study?
Real-time heart rate monitoring is essential for patient health management, and alternative low-cost detection systems are needed to improve continuous pulse monitoring.
Does a low-cost piezoelectric ceramic sensor accurately detect heart rate compared to traditional sensors in volunteers?
Observational (n=21)
Does a low-cost piezoelectric ceramic sensor accurately detect heart rate compared to traditional sensors in volunteers?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A low-cost piezoelectric ceramic sensor provides accurate heart rate monitoring comparable to traditional sensors, offering a potential alternative for continuous pulse waveform monitoring.
Real-time vital signs monitoring, particularly heart rate, is essential in today's medical practice and research. Heart rate detection allows the doctor to monitor the patient's health status to provide immediate action against possible cardiovascular diseases. We present a possible alternative to traditional heart rate signal monitoring systems, a cardiac pulse system using low-cost piezoelectric signal identification. This system could benefit health care and develop continuous pulse waveform monitoring systems. This paper introduces a heartbeat per minute (BPM) cardiac pulse detection system based on a low-cost piezoelectric ceramic sensor (PCS). The PCS is placed under the wrist and adjusted with a silicone wristband to measure the pressure exerted by the radial artery on the sensor and thus obtain the patient's BPM. We propose a signal conditioning stage to reduce the sensor's noise when acquiring the data and make it suitable for real-time BPM visualization. As a comparison, we performed a statistical test to compare the low-cost PCS with types of traditional sensors, along with the help of 21 volunteers. Experimental results show that the data collected by the PCS, when used for heart rate detection, is highly accurate and close to traditional sensor measurements. Therefore, we conclude that the system efficiently monitors the cardiac pulse signal in BPM.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cepeda et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Healthy (n=21). Piezoelectric ceramic sensor (PCS) vs. XD-58C pulse sensor and Innovo oximeter was evaluated on Heart rate measurement (BPM) accuracy compared to traditional sensors (F-value 0.07, p=0.9326). A low-cost piezoelectric ceramic sensor provided heart rate measurements that were statistically equivalent to traditional commercial sensors (p=0.9326), demonstrating its potential for continuous pulse monitoring.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: