EMBEC 2017, NBC 2017: EMBEC & NBC 2017 pp 302-305 | Cite as
Electrode Comparison for Textile-Integrated Electrocardiogram and Impedance Pneumography Measurement
Abstract
Wearable electronics is a quickly broadening category in sports, wellbeing and entertainment products. Also, fully textile-integrated electronics is used increasingly to improve user experience. Medical industry is interested in exploiting, especially the latter sub-category of wearable electronics in long-term home care. In this study, we report a textile-integrated electrocardiography (ECG) and impedance pneumography (IP) measurement system. The performance of the system is evaluated by comparing the measurement accuracy for heart rate and respiration rate obtained with different electrode types and different measurement methods. Three electrode types: disposable, textile, and printed electrodes, are investigated and both, bipolar and tetrapolar measurement methods are compared by using a modified commercial evaluation board. Disposable electrodes provide the least noisy signal and the most stable results. However, the skin irritation caused by these electrodes prevents their use in long-term monitoring. The textile and printed electrodes did not seem to cause similar skin irritation. From the two measuring techniques, tetrapolar measuring method had higher noise levels, but heart rate and breathing were estimated with better accuracy compared to bipolar measuring method.
Keywords
medical analog front-end electrocardiogram impedance pneumography textile-integrated electronicsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1. Chronic Conditions: A challenge for the 21st century (1999) National Academy on an Aging Society. Vol. 1.Google Scholar
- 2. Department of Economics and Social Affairs of United Nations. 2009., World population Ageing 2009, New York: United NationsGoogle Scholar
- 3. Fish C (1989) Evolution of the Clinical Electrocardiogram. JACC 14(5):1127Google Scholar
- 4. Cretikos M.A, Bellomo R, Hillman K, Chen J, Finfer S, Flabouris A (2008) Respiratory rate: the neglected vital sign. Medi J Auts 188(11):657Google Scholar
- 5. Kenward G, Hodgetts T, Castle N (2011) Time to put the R back in TPS. Nursing Times 97(40):32Google Scholar
- 6. Cretikos M, Chen J, Hillman K, Bellomo R, Finfer S, Flabouris A (2007) The Objective medical emergency team activation criteria: A case-control study. Resuscitation 73:62Google Scholar
- 7. Grimnes S., Martinsen Ø. M., (2007), Sources of error in tetrapolar impedance measurements on biomaterials and other ionic conductors, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 40, pp. 9–14Google Scholar
- 8. Seppä V-P, Hyttinen J, Uitto M, Chrapek W and Viik J: Novel electrode configuration for highly linear impedance pneumography. Biomedical Engineering - Biomedizinische Technik 2013;58(1):35–8Google Scholar
- 9. Malmivuo J, Plonsey R (1995) Bioelectromagnetism. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 10. Texas Instruments Low-Power 2-Channel 24-Bit Analog Front-End for Biopotential Measurements at https://upverter.com/datasheet/f39f35c56d2f15248d62f0eb022e7b7680d7e31f.pdf.
- 11. Suikkola J., et al., Screen Printing Fabrication and Characterization of Stretchable Electronics, Scientific Reports 6, Article number: 25784 (2016), doi: 10.1038/srep25784