Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2000
[Evaluation of the cardiorespiratory monitor SpiroGuard C for infants. Improved registration of respiratory events by new sensors and intelligent alarm management system].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Urschitz M S, Eichler F, Popow C, Ipsiroglu O S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The SpiroGuard C is a commercially available cardiorespiratory monitor working with field plethysmography, wireless signal transmission and a novel alarm management system. In order to determine the recognition rates for central, mixed and obstructive apneas, a prospective clinical trial was performed comparing frequency and kind of signals from the monitor with those simultaneously registered by polysomnographic studies.
DESIGN: Normal respiratory and alarm signals of the monitor under investigation were integrated into a polysomnographic setting. All central, mixed and obstructive apneas lasting more than 10 seconds as well as all alarms obtained from the monitor were evaluated.
RESULTS: 47 series of monitor recordings could be evaluated in parallel to polysomnographic studies: the detection rate for central apneas was 298/328 (90.85%), for mixed apneas 9/41 (21.95%) and for obstructive apneas 0/36 (0%). Out of the total of 708 registered alarms 359 (50.71%) were false alarms, 307 (43.36%) were apnea-related and 42/708 (5.93%) were alarms due to technical problems. 177 of the 359 false alarms (49.30%) occurred during apneas that were shorter than 10 seconds, 119 (33.15%) were related to bad signal quality, and 55 (15.32%) were caused by movement artifacts.
CONCLUSION: The recognition rate for central apneas was high (> 90%), while sensitivity for mixed and obstructive apneas was not satisfactory. Approximately half of the alarms were false alarms. These could be reduced by setting the apnea detection time to > 15 seconds, by tighter fastening of the respiration belt (improving the signal transmission), and by turning off the instrument when the child is awake and physically active. The wireless system renders the SpiroGuard C an attractive alternative for home monitoring.
DESIGN: Normal respiratory and alarm signals of the monitor under investigation were integrated into a polysomnographic setting. All central, mixed and obstructive apneas lasting more than 10 seconds as well as all alarms obtained from the monitor were evaluated.
RESULTS: 47 series of monitor recordings could be evaluated in parallel to polysomnographic studies: the detection rate for central apneas was 298/328 (90.85%), for mixed apneas 9/41 (21.95%) and for obstructive apneas 0/36 (0%). Out of the total of 708 registered alarms 359 (50.71%) were false alarms, 307 (43.36%) were apnea-related and 42/708 (5.93%) were alarms due to technical problems. 177 of the 359 false alarms (49.30%) occurred during apneas that were shorter than 10 seconds, 119 (33.15%) were related to bad signal quality, and 55 (15.32%) were caused by movement artifacts.
CONCLUSION: The recognition rate for central apneas was high (> 90%), while sensitivity for mixed and obstructive apneas was not satisfactory. Approximately half of the alarms were false alarms. These could be reduced by setting the apnea detection time to > 15 seconds, by tighter fastening of the respiration belt (improving the signal transmission), and by turning off the instrument when the child is awake and physically active. The wireless system renders the SpiroGuard C an attractive alternative for home monitoring.