2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.microrel.2018.06.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reliability analysis of an integrated device of ECG, PPG and pressure pulse wave for cardiovascular disease

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, a commercial infrared pulse device, HKG‐07C+, provided fingertip photoplethysmography (PPG) to compare with NIR signals. The PPG device had been applied in study on cardiovascular diseases .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, a commercial infrared pulse device, HKG‐07C+, provided fingertip photoplethysmography (PPG) to compare with NIR signals. The PPG device had been applied in study on cardiovascular diseases .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using a finger, toe, or earlobe, the volumetric waveforms can be easily detected by measuring the transmission of infrared light through skin. The measurement of the PWV is, ideally, measured using pressure sensors or ultrasonic probes at two sites, but since the peaks in three waveforms of ECG, PPG, and pressure pulse show very good agreement [21], PWV can be obtained by combining two of ECG, PPG, pressure pulse, and blood flow waveforms. The main advantage of PWV measurements using ECG and PPG is that they can measure both hands in a non-supine position, and there are several commercially available analog front-end (AFE) chips for ECG and PPG measurements [22], making it possible to miniaturize the measuring device.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the study, we use the Elite HRV CorSense PPG and Polar H10 ECG sensors for ground truth. PPG sensors are known to produce comparable R–R interval accuracies to ECG, with high correlation coefficients between 0.968 and 0.998 50 , 51 . To verify this, we performed a comparison test between the ground truth sensors on two healthy participants and noted that the mean absolute R–R interval difference was 11 ms.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%