Department of Emergency Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seongdong-gu, Republic of Korea.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Hanyang University Guri Hospital, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
BMJ Open. 2019 Feb 19;9(2):e023627. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023627.
The purpose of this study was to assess whether a photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor in a smart watch can accurately recognise the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in cardiac arrest patients compared with carotid artery palpation.
This prospective observational study was conducted on 50 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients who visited the emergency department (ED) of one tertiary hospital. As soon as the patient arrived at the ED, advanced cardiac life support was carried out immediately. At this time, three smart watches were attached to the carotid artery, forehead and wrist and were checked for pulse measurements every 2 min. In the case of ROSC, blood pressure, heart rate and heart rate regularity were confirmed, and pulse was simultaneously measured at three sites with smart watches. In the case of no ROSC, only the pulse was measured at three sites with the smart watches.
There were 33 males (66%) and the mean age was 68±11.57 years. In 14 patients (28%), spontaneous circulation was recovered through cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and all survived. The sensitivity and specificity of manual palpation were 78.6% and 90.4%, respectively. False-positive and false-negative rates were 9.6% and 21.4%, respectively. Smart watches at all three sites had the same or higher sensitivity than manual palpation. The sensitivity of the smart watch was the highest, at 100%, in the carotid region and the lowest, at 78.6%, in the wrist region. The specificity of the smart watch was the highest, at 100%, in the wrist region and the lowest, at 78.7%, in the carotid region.
Compared with manual pulse check, the PPG sensor embedded in the smart watch showed the same sensitivity and a higher specificity for recognising ROSC when measured at the wrist.
本研究旨在评估智能手表中的光电容积脉搏波(PPG)传感器与颈动脉触诊相比,能否准确识别心脏骤停患者自主循环的恢复(ROSC)。
本前瞻性观察研究纳入了 50 名在一家三级医院急诊科就诊的院外心脏骤停患者。患者一到急诊科,即立即开始进行高级心脏生命支持。此时,将三只智能手表分别贴附于颈动脉、额头和手腕处,每 2 分钟检查一次脉搏测量值。一旦出现 ROSC,确认血压、心率和心率规律,并同时在三个部位使用智能手表测量脉搏。如果没有出现 ROSC,则仅在三个部位使用智能手表测量脉搏。
33 名男性(66%),平均年龄为 68±11.57 岁。14 名患者(28%)通过心肺复苏恢复了自主循环,所有患者均存活。手动触诊的敏感性和特异性分别为 78.6%和 90.4%。假阳性和假阴性率分别为 9.6%和 21.4%。所有三个部位的智能手表的敏感性均与手动触诊相同或更高。智能手表在颈动脉区域的敏感性最高,为 100%,在手腕区域的敏感性最低,为 78.6%。智能手表在手腕区域的特异性最高,为 100%,在颈动脉区域的特异性最低,为 78.7%。
与手动脉搏检查相比,PPG 传感器在手腕部位测量时,对识别 ROSC 的敏感性与手动检查相同,特异性更高。