Banzett R B, Mahan S T, Garner D M, Brughera A, Loring S H
Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
J Appl Physiol (1985). 1995 Dec;79(6):2169-76. doi: 10.1152/jappl.1995.79.6.2169.
We present a simple and reliable method to calibrate respiratory magnetometers and Respitrace to infer respiratory volume changes. As in earlier methods, we assume two degrees of freedom in the chest wall and that volume displacement depends linearly on surface motion at the rib cage and abdomen. Because the area of the rib cage is larger, a given motion of its surface produces a greater lung volume change; therefore, the rib cage motion signal is given a larger gain before the two signals are added to estimate volume. In contrast to earlier methods, we use a "standard ratio" to weight relative gains of the rib cage and abdominal signals for all subjects rather than determining a gain ratio for each individual subject. Our procedure does not require subjects to perform the sometimes difficult isovolume maneuvers used in the calibration method of Konno and Mead (J. Appl. Physiol. 22: 407-422, 1967), does not require statistical computation used in the multiple-breath linear regression method, and does not produce the occasional substantial errors in gain ratio that may occur with the other methods. When magnetometers are used, the standard ratio is 4:1 (rib cage-to-abdomen); when Respitrace is used, the standard ratio is 2:1. In 11 subjects, calibration with standard ratios was as accurate as the isovolume and linear regression techniques. Accuracy during normal breathing was nearly always within 10% (median 2%), but occasional large errors occurred with both instruments.
我们提出了一种简单可靠的方法来校准呼吸磁力计和呼吸轨迹仪以推断呼吸容积变化。与早期方法一样,我们假设胸壁有两个自由度,并且容积位移与胸腔和腹部的表面运动呈线性相关。由于胸腔面积较大,其表面的给定运动产生的肺容积变化更大;因此,在将两个信号相加以估计容积之前,给胸腔运动信号赋予更大的增益。与早期方法不同,我们使用“标准比率”来权衡所有受试者胸腔和腹部信号的相对增益,而不是为每个个体受试者确定增益比率。我们的程序不需要受试者执行Konno和Mead校准方法(《应用生理学杂志》22: 407 - 422, 1967)中有时很困难的等容操作,不需要多呼吸线性回归方法中使用的统计计算,也不会产生其他方法可能出现的偶尔的增益比率重大误差。使用磁力计时,标准比率为4:1(胸腔与腹部);使用呼吸轨迹仪时,标准比率为2:1。在11名受试者中,用标准比率进行校准与等容和线性回归技术一样准确。正常呼吸期间的准确性几乎总是在10%以内(中位数为2%),但两种仪器偶尔都会出现较大误差。