Development of Electrohysterogram Recording System for Monitoring Uterine Contraction.
Journal
Journal of healthcare engineering
ISSN: 2040-2309
Titre abrégé: J Healthc Eng
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101528166
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
03
03
2019
revised:
21
05
2019
accepted:
02
06
2019
entrez:
30
7
2019
pubmed:
30
7
2019
medline:
6
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Uterine contraction (UC) is an important clinical indictor for monitoring uterine activity. The purpose of this study is to develop a portable electrohysterogram (EHG) recording system (called PregCare) for monitoring UCs with EHG signals. The PregCare consisted of sensors, a signal acquisition device, and a computer with application software. Eight-channel EHG signals, the tocodynamometry (TOCO) signal, and maternal perception were recorded simultaneously by the signal acquisition device controlled by the computer via Bluetooth. PregCare was firstly evaluated by a signal simulator. Its relative error (RE) and coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated, and its agreement with the commercial instrument PowerLab was assessed by Bland-Altman plots. After that, PregCare was applied to 20 pregnant women in a hospital to record their EHG signals. These EHG signals were preprocessed and segmented into UCs and non-UCs. Then, the EHG features corresponding to UCs and non-UCs were extracted, respectively, including power spectral density (PSD), root mean square (RMS), peak frequency (PF), median frequency (MDF), and sample entropy (SamEn). One-way ANOVA was employed to assess the difference between UCs and non-UCs. The results show that RE and CV were less than 8% and 0.03%, respectively, which indicated the high accuracy and repeatability of PregCare. The small differences of mean and standard deviation indicated the high agreement between PregCare and PowerLab. Besides, the PSD of UCs was much larger than non-UCs between 0 and 0.7 Hz. RMS of UCs was significantly larger than non-UCs (
Identifiants
pubmed: 31354930
doi: 10.1155/2019/4230157
pmc: PMC6636524
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4230157Références
Comput Math Methods Med. 2013;2013:627976
pubmed: 24489602
Ann Biomed Eng. 2017 Sep;45(9):2196-2210
pubmed: 28660431
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2008 Sep;46(9):911-22
pubmed: 18437439
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 21;9(1):e86775
pubmed: 24466235
Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2009 Aug;64(8):529-41
pubmed: 19624864
Comput Math Methods Med. 2014;2014:470786
pubmed: 24523828
Physiol Meas. 2008 Jul;29(7):829-41
pubmed: 18583724
Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2007 Jun;18(3):289-95
pubmed: 17659954
Comput Math Methods Med. 2013;2013:485684
pubmed: 24454536
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014 Jun 05;14:192
pubmed: 24898548
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Mar;204(3):228.e1-10
pubmed: 21145033
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
pubmed: 2868172
Sci Data. 2015 Apr 28;2:150017
pubmed: 25984349
Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2012;4(1):66-72
pubmed: 24753891
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2010 Jan;23(1):17-22
pubmed: 19672790
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001 Apr;95(2):149-53
pubmed: 11301159
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2010 Sep;57(9):2178-87
pubmed: 20460202
Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2017 Jul;2017:2924-2927
pubmed: 29060510
Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol. 2011 Oct;215(5):199-204
pubmed: 22028060
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1986 Dec;33(12):1182-7
pubmed: 3817852