Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 97–103 | Cite as

Comparative Provocation Test of Respiratory Monitoring Methods

  • Mia Folke
  • Fredrik Granstedt
  • Bertil Hök
  • Håkan Scheer


Objective.The aim of this study was to compare clinicallyrelevant performance of: 1) a prototype respiratory sensor based oncapnometry with two alternative signal receptor fixations, 2) afiberoptic humidity sensor and 3) human visual observation. Comparativeprovocation tests were performed on volunteers at the Post-AnesthesiaCare Unit at Västerås Central Hospital. Methods.Theexperimental tests involved 10 healthy, voluntary test subjects,instructed to intersperse normal breathing with protocol provocations ofbreath holding, limb and head movements, and nasal oxygen supplement.The signal outputs from the three respiratory monitoring methods wererecorded on a personal computer. The signal analysis included visualcategorising of the signals and counting breath events. Recognising thatnone of the methods could act as reference, events were classified as“unanimous,” “majority” or“minority” events depending on how many of the three methodsthat detected a breath. Results.The average total recording timewas 37 minutes per subject. The respiratory rates varied from 6.5 to 19breaths per minute, with a mean value of 11.4 breaths/minute. The breathhold duration ranged from 18 to 50 seconds. Discrepancies between thethree methods were found in more than 20% of the marked events.The most frequent majority events were due to events not recorded by theobserver who, on the other hand, contributed the least to minorityevents. The provocations made by the subjects during the measurement didnot increase the rates of majority and minority events, compared toperiods of no provocation. The fiberoptic device exhibited a largercount of minority events but a smaller contribution to majority eventsthan the capnometry prototype. Conclusions.The capnometry andfiberoptic sensors exhibit differences in responses that may beunderstood from basic principles. The importance of the physicalapplication of the sensor to the patient was clearly observed. Theoptimum design remains to be found.

Non-invasive measurement respiratory rate intensive care gas exchange monitoring respiration 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gustafsson L, Schildt B, Jacobsen K. Adverse effects of extradural and intrathecal opiates; report of a nationwide survey in Sweden. Br J Anaesth 1982; 54: 479Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gravenstein JS. Monitoring in the post-operating period. Current Anesthesia and Critical Care. New York: Churchill Livingstone 1991; 32–36Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gill NP, Wright B, Reilly CS. Relationship between hypoxaemic and cardiac ischaemic events in the perioperative period. Br J Anaesth 1992; 68: 471–473Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tiret L, Desmonts JM, Hatton F, Vourch G. Complications associated with anaesthesia-a postoperative survey in France. Can Anaesth Soc J 1986; 33: 336–344Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berti M, Casati A, Fanelli G, Albertin A, Palmisano S, Danelli G, Comotti L, Torri G. 0.2% Ropivacaine with or without fentanyl for patient-controlled epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery: A double-blind study. J Clin Anaesth 2000; 12: 292–297Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kehlet H, Rosenberg J. Late post-operative hypoxaemia and organ dysfunction. Eur J Anaesth 1995; 12: 31–34Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    JonesJ G, Sapsford DJ, Wheatley RG. Postoperative hypoxemia: Mechanisms and time course. Anesthesiology 1990; 45: 566–573Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johansson A, Öberg PÅ, Sedin G. Monitoring of heart and respiratory ratesi n newborn infants using a new photoplethysmographic technique. J Clin Mon Comput 1999; 15: 461–467Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lindberg L, Ugnell H, Öberg PÅ. Monitoring of respiratory and heart rates using a fiber-optic sensor. Med & Biol Eng & Comput 1992; 30: 533–537Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nakajima K, Tamura T, Miike H. Monitoring of heart and respiratory rates by photoplethysmography using a digital filtering technique. Med Eng Phys 1996; 18: 365–372Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Barschdorff D, Zhang W. Respiratory rhythm detection with photoplethysmographic methods. IEEE 1994; 912–913Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cohen KP, Ladd WM, Beams DM, Sheers WS, Radwin RG, Tompkins WJ, Webster JG. Comparison of impedance and inductance ventilation sensors on adults during breathing, motion, and simulated airway obstruction. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1997; 44 (7): 555–566Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hoffman S, Jedeikin R, Atlas D. Respiratory monitoring with a new impedance plethysmograph. Anaesthesia 1986; 41: 1139–1142Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Siivola J. New noninvasive piezoelectric transducer for recording of respiration, heart rate and body movements. Med & Biol Eng & Comput 1989; 27: 423–424Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Waag Carlson B, Neelon VJ, Hsiao H. Evaluation of a non-invasive respiratory monitoring system for sleeping subjects. Physiol Meas 1999; 20: 53–63Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hök B, Wiklund L, Henneberg S. A new respiratory monitor: development and initial clinical experience. Int J Clin Monit Comp 1993; 10: 101–107Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vegfors M, Lindberg L-G, Pettersson H, Öberg PÅ. Presentation and evaluation of a new optical sensor for respiratory rate monitoring. Int J Clin Monit Comp 1994; 11: 151–156Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lenz G, Heipertz W, Epple E. Capnometry for continuous postoperative monitoring of nonintubated, spontaneously breathing patients. J Clin Monit 1991; 7: 245–248Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sage J, Gough W. A simple inexpensive device for monitoring patient respiration. Med & Biol Eng & Comput 1998; 36: 231–232Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tatara T, Tsuzaki K. An apnea monitor using a rapid-response hygrometer. J Clin Monit 1997; 13: 5–9Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dodds D, Purdy J, Moulton D. The PEP transducer: A new way of measuring respiratory rate in the nonintubated patient. J Accid Emerg Med 1999; 16: 26–28Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cyna AM, Kulkarni V, Tunstall ME, Hutchison JMS, Mallard JR. Aura: A new respiratory monitor and apnoea alarm for spontaneously breathing patients. Br J Anaesth 1991; 67: 341–345Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kavanagh BP, Sandler AS, Turner KE. Use of end-tidal PCO2 as noninvasive measurement of arterial PCO2 in extubated patients recovering from general anerthesia. J Clin Monit 1992; 8: 226–230Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Friesen RH, Alswang M. End-tidal PCO2 Monitoring via nasal cannulae in pediatric patients: Accuracy and sources of error. J Clin Monit 1996; 12: 155–159Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sanders MH, Kern NB, Costantino JP, Stiller RA, Strollo PJ, Studnicki KA, Coates JA, Richards TJ. Accuracy of End-Tidal and Transcutaneous PCO2 Monitoring During Sleep. Chest 1994; 106: 472–483Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wiklund L, Hök B, Ståhl K, Jordeby-Jönsson A. Post-anestesia monitoring revisited: Frequency of true and false alarms from different monitoring devices. J Clin Anaesth 1994; 6: 182–188Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gordh T, Rawal N, Ström S, Hoök B. Respiratory monitoring during postoperative analgesia. J Clin Monit 1995; 11 (6): 365–372Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hök B, TallforsM, Sandberg G, Bluckert A. A new sensor for indoor air quality control. In: Eurosensors XII, 13–16 September, Southampton, UK, 1998.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Granstedt F, Folke M, Bäcklund Y, Hök B. Gas sensor with electroacoustically coupled resonator. In: Eurosensors XIV, 27–30 August, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mia Folke
    • 1
  • Fredrik Granstedt
    • 1
  • Bertil Hök
    • 2
  • Håkan Scheer
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Electrical EngineeringMälardalens HögskolaSweden
  2. 2.Hök Instrument ABVästeråsSweden
  3. 3.Departement of Anesthesia and Intensive CareVästerås Central HospitalSweden

Personalised recommendations