Advertisement

Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing

, Volume 34, Issue 5, pp 351–354 | Cite as

Effect of skin impedance on image quality and variability in electrical impedance tomography: a model study

  • K. G. Boone
  • D. S. Holder
CAIT

Abstract

A computer simulation is used to investigate the relationship between skin impedance and image artefacts in electrical impedance tomography. Sets of electrode impedance are generated with a pseudo-random distribution and used to introduce errors in boundary voltage measurements. To simplify the analysis, the non-idealities in the current injection circuit are replaced by a fixed common-mode error term. The boundary voltages are reconstructed into images and inspected. Where the simulated skin impedance remains constant between measurements, large impedances (>2kΩ) do not cause significant degradation of the image. Where the skin impedances ‘drift’ between measurements, a drift of 5% from a starting impedance of 100Ω is sufficient to cause significant image distortion. If the skin impedances vary randomly between measurements, they have to be less than 10 Ω to allow satisfactory images. Skin impedances are typically 100–200 Ω at 50 kHz on unprepared skin. These values are sufficient to cause image distortion if they drift over time. It is concluded that the patient's skin should be abraded to reduce impedance, and measurements should be avoided in the first 10 min after electrode placement.

Keywords

Electrical impedance tomography Impedance Skin 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boone, K. G., andHolder, D. S. (1995a): ‘Assessment of noise and drift artefacts in electrical impedance tomography measurements using the Sheffield Mark I system’,Innov. Tech. Biol. Med.,16, (2), pp. 49–60Google Scholar
  2. Boone, K. G., andHolder, D. S. (1995b): ‘A model of the effect of variations in contact and skin impedance on APT measurement artefacts’,-Ibid.,16, (2), pp. 61–70Google Scholar
  3. Barber, D. C., andSeagar, A. D. (1987): ‘The Sheffield data collection system’,Clin. Phys. Physiol. Meas.,8, (Suppl A), pp. 91–98Google Scholar
  4. Geddes, L. (1972): ‘Electrodes and the measurement of bioelectric events’, (John Wiley & Sons New York)Google Scholar
  5. Hua, P., Woo, E. J., andWebster, J. G. (1993a): ‘Using compound electrodes in electrical impedance tomography,’IEEE Trans.,BME-40, pp. 29–34Google Scholar
  6. Hua, P., Woo, E. J., Webster, J. G., andTomkins, W. I. (1993b): ‘Finite element modelling of the electrode-skin contact impedance in electrical impedance tomography’,-Ibid.,BME-40, pp. 335–43Google Scholar
  7. McAdams, E. A., andJossinet, I. (1990): ‘Electrode-skin impedance in impedance tomography’,Hames, T. J. (Ed.), ‘Proc. Eur. Community Concerted Action on Electrical Impedance Tomography, Copenhagen (Sheffield University Press, Sheffield, UK) pp. 14–19Google Scholar
  8. Record, P., Gadd, R., andRolfe, P. (1990): ‘A signal-conditioning electrode for use in electrical impedance tomography.’-Ibid. pp. 168–174Google Scholar
  9. Riu, P. J., Lozano, A., andRosell, J. (1990): ‘Errors in tomography systems caused by reactive electrode impedance.’-Ibid. pp. 198–205Google Scholar
  10. Woo, E. J. (1990): ‘A finite-element method and reconstruction algorithms in electrical impedance tomography.’ PhD Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFMBE 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. G. Boone
    • 1
  • D. S. Holder
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysiologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations