4.6 Article

Development of a Hand Motion-based Assessment System for Endotracheal Intubation Training

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SYSTEMS
卷 45, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10916-021-01755-2

关键词

Assessment system; Classification model; Endotracheal intubation; Feature selection; Training device

资金

  1. American Heart Association [118243-S02, 118243-S03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Endotracheal intubation is a critical skill in emergency or intensive care, and this study explores the feasibility of assessing ETI proficiency using hand motion features. Experimental results show that an artificial neural network classifier based on a small number of hand motion features achieves a high accuracy rate.
Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a procedure to manage and secure an unconscious patient's airway. It is one of the most critical skills in emergency or intensive care. Regular training and practice are required for medical providers to maintain proficiency. Currently, ETI training is assessed by human supervisors who may make inconsistent assessments. This study aims at developing an automated assessment system that analyzes ETI skills and classifies a trainee into an experienced or a novice immediately after training. To make the system more available and affordable, we investigate the feasibility of utilizing only hand motion features as determining factors of ETI proficiency. To this end, we extract 18 features from hand motion in time and frequency domains, and also 12 force features for comparison. Subsequently, feature selection algorithms are applied to identify an ideal feature set for developing classification models. Experimental results show that an artificial neural network (ANN) classifier with five hand motion features selected by a correlation-based algorithm achieves the highest accuracy of 91.17% while an ANN with five force features has only 80.06%. This study corroborates that a simple assessment system based on a small number of hand motion features can be effective in assisting ETI training.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据