Comparison of phonocardiographic monitoring locations

This is a pilot study comparing phonocardiographic (PCG, or heart sound) monitoring locations used during anaesthesia and surgery. Heart sounds from anaesthetised surgical patients were simultaneously recorded from a precordial stethoscope, an esophageal stethoscope, and a special endotracheal tube...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inProceedings of 17th International Conference of the Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Vol. 1; pp. 685 - 686 vol.1
Main Authors Rice, M.L., Doyle, D.J.
Format Conference Proceeding
LanguageEnglish
Published IEEE 1995
Subjects
Amplitude estimation
Digital signal processing
Esophagus
Heart
Patient monitoring
Safety
Signal analysis
Signal to noise ratio
Stethoscope
Surgery
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:This is a pilot study comparing phonocardiographic (PCG, or heart sound) monitoring locations used during anaesthesia and surgery. Heart sounds from anaesthetised surgical patients were simultaneously recorded from a precordial stethoscope, an esophageal stethoscope, and a special endotracheal tube (ETT) designed for PCG monitoring (Teves ETT). These heart sounds were then analysed using digital signal processing techniques. The first heart sounds (S1) were characterized using signal-to-noise ratio estimates, maximum-to-minimum amplitude differences, and S1 power spectra. The first heart sound obtained from the esophageal stethoscope had the best signal strength and clarity. However, the strength and clarity of the first heart sound obtained from the precordial stethoscope and Teves ETT were quite satisfactory. Thus, from a signal analysis perspective there is little difference between S1 obtained from the different monitoring sites. Consequently a choice of PCG monitoring site should be based on practical considerations such as patient safety or ease of use.
ISBN:0780324757
9780780324756
DOI:10.1109/IEMBS.1995.575312