4.6 Article

Characteristic Ratio-Independent Arterial Stiffness-Based Blood Pressure Estimation

Journal

IEEE JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH INFORMATICS
Volume 21, Issue 5, Pages 1263-1270

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JBHI.2016.2594177

Keywords

Arterial stiffness (AS); blood pressure (BP); mathematical modeling; non-invasive blood pressure measurement; oscillometry

Funding

  1. Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Noninvasive blood pressure (BP) measurement is an important tool for managing hypertension and cardiovascular disease. However, automated noninvasive BP measurement devices, which are usually based on the oscillometric method, do not always provide accurate estimation of BR It has been found that change in arterial stiffness (AS) is an underlying mechanism of disagreement between an oscillometric BP monitor and a sphygmomanometer. This problem is addressed by incorporating parameters related to AS in the algorithm for BP measurement. Pulse transit time (PTT) is first used to estimate AS parameters, which are fixed into a model of the oscillometric envelope. This model can then be used to perform curve fitting to the measured signal using only four parameters: systolic BP, diastolic BP, mean BP, and lumen area at zero transmural pressure. The proposed technique is independent of the experimentally determined characteristic ratios that are commonly used in existing oscillometric methods. The accuracy of the proposed technique was evaluated by comparing with the same model without incorporation of AS, and with reference BP device measurements. The new method achieved standard deviation of error less than 8 mmHg and mean error less than 5 mmHg. The results show consistency with ANSI/AAMI SP-10 standard for noninvasive BP measurement techniques.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available