No abstract

Demographic changes and increasing air pollution entail that monitoring of respiratory parameters is in the focus of research. In this study, two customary inertial measurement units (IMUs) are used to measure the breathing rate by using quaternions. One IMU was located ventral, and one was located dorsal on the thorax with a belt. The relative angle between the quaternion of each IMU was calculated and compared to the respiratory frequency obtained by a spirometer, which was used as a reference. A frequency analysis of both signals showed that the obtained respiratory rates vary slightly (less than 0.2/min) between the two systems. The introduced belt can analyse the respiratory rate and can be used for surveillance tasks in clinical settings.

No abstract

Background and objective: Lung mechanics measurements provide clinically useful information about disease progression and lung health. Currently, there are no commonly practiced methods to non-invasively measure both resistive and elastic lung mechanics during tidal breathing, preventing the important information provided by lung mechanics from being utilised. This study presents a novel method to easily assess lung mechanics of spontaneously breathing subjects using a dynamic elastance, single-compartment lung model. Methods: A spirometer with a built-in shutter was used to occlude expiration during tidal breathing, creating exponentially decaying flow when the shutter reopened. The lung mechanics measured were respiratory system elastance and resistance, separated from the exponentially decaying flow, and interrupter resistance calculated at shutter closure. Progressively increasing resistance was added to the spirometer mouthpiece to simulate upper airway obstruction. The lung mechanics of 17 healthy subjects were successfully measured through spirometry. Results: N = 17 (8 female, 9 male) healthy subjects were recruited. Measured decay rates ranged from 5 to 42/s, subjects with large variation of decay rates showed higher muscular breathing effort. Lung elastance measurements ranged from 3.9 to 21.2 cmH 2 O/L, with no clear trend between change in elastance and added resistance. Resistance calculated from decay rate and elastance ranged from 0.15 to 1.95 cmH 2 Os/L. These very small resistance values are due to the airflow measured originating from lowresistance areas in the centre of airways. Occlusion resistance measurements were as expected for healthy subjects, and increased as expected as resistance was added. Conclusions: This test was able to identify reasonable dynamic lung elastance and occlusion resistance values, providing new insight into expiratory breathing effort. Clinically, this lung function test could impact current practice. It does not require high levels of cooperation from the subject, allowing a wider cohort of patients to be assessed more easily. Additionally, this test can be simply implemented in a small standalone device, or with standard lung function testing equipment.

No abstract