Huthart Samuel, Elgendi Mohamed, Zheng Dingchang, Stansby Gerard, Allen John
Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Front Digit Health. 2020 Dec 21;2:619692. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2020.619692. eCollection 2020.
Despite the vast number of photoplethysmography (PPG) research publications and growing demands for such sensing in Digital and Wearable Health platforms, there appears little published on signal quality expectations for morphological pulse analysis. Aim: to determine a consensus regarding the minimum number of undistorted i.e., diagnostic quality pulses required, as well as a threshold proportion of noisy beats for recording rejection. Questionnaire distributed to international fellow researchers in skin contact PPG measurements on signal quality expectations and associated factors concerning recording length, expected artifact-free pulses ("diagnostic quality") in a trace, proportion of trace having artifact to justify excluding/repeating measurements, minimum beats required, and number of respiratory cycles. 18 (of 26) PPG researchers responded. Modal range estimates considered a 2-min recording time as target for morphological analysis. Respondents expected a recording to have 86-95% of diagnostic quality pulses, at least 11-20 sequential pulses of diagnostic quality and advocated a 26-50% noise threshold for recording rejection. There were broader responses found for the required number of undistorted beats (although a modal range of 51-60 beats for both finger and toe sites was indicated). For morphological PPG pulse wave analysis recording acceptability was indicated if <50% of beats have artifact and preferably that a minimum of 50 non-distorted PPG pulses are present (with at least 11-20 sequential) to be of diagnostic quality. Estimates from this knowledge transfer exercise should help inform students and researchers as a guide in standards development for PPG study design.
尽管有大量关于光电容积脉搏波描记法(PPG)的研究出版物,并且数字和可穿戴健康平台对这种传感的需求不断增长,但关于形态学脉搏分析的信号质量期望却鲜有发表。目的:就所需的未失真(即诊断质量)脉搏的最小数量以及用于记录拒绝的噪声搏动的阈值比例达成共识。向从事皮肤接触式PPG测量的国际同行研究人员分发了问卷,内容涉及信号质量期望以及与记录长度、迹线中预期的无伪影脉搏(“诊断质量”)、具有伪影以证明排除/重复测量合理的迹线比例、所需的最小搏动数以及呼吸周期数相关的因素。26名PPG研究人员中有18人做出了回应。模态范围估计将2分钟的记录时间视为形态学分析的目标。受访者期望记录中有86 - 95%的诊断质量脉搏,至少有11 - 20个连续的诊断质量脉搏,并主张将26 - 50%的噪声阈值用于记录拒绝。对于所需的未失真搏动数量有更广泛的回应(尽管指出手指和脚趾部位的模态范围均为51 - 60次搏动)。对于形态学PPG脉搏波分析,如果<50%的搏动有伪影,则表明记录可接受,并且最好有至少50个未失真的PPG脉冲(至少11 - 20个连续)具有诊断质量。这次知识转移活动的估计结果应有助于为学生和研究人员提供信息,作为PPG研究设计标准制定的指南。