Article Text

PDF
M146 Validation Of Five Non-invasive Respiratory Rate Monitors In Patients With Copd In A Laboratory Setting
  1. Noah Rubio1,
  2. Brian McKinstry2,
  3. Richard Parker3,
  4. Hilary Pinnock2,
  5. Christopher Weir2,
  6. Janet Hanley4,
  7. Claire Yerramasu1,
  8. Leandro Cruz-Mantoani1,
  9. William MacNee1,
  10. Roberto A Rabinovich1
  1. 1Edinburgh Lung and the Environment Group Initiative (ELEGI), Centre for Inflammation and Research, Queens Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  2. 2Centre for Population Health Sciences University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  3. 3Edinburgh Clinical Trial Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  4. 4Centre for Wellbeing and Healthcare, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK

Abstract

Introduction There is a need of innovative models of care for patients with severe COPD and frequent AECOPD, and Telehealth (TH) is part of these programs. But current systems are limited by the parameters feasibly monitored in a domestic setting and lack of a reliable method of predicting exacerbations. Evidence from hospital based studies show that breathlessness increases during exacerbations. If respiratory rate (RR) could be reliably monitored remotely it may provide a significant advance in predicting and identifying COPD exacerbations and monitoring recovery. The aim of this study is to validate five non-invasive RR monitors (M1 to M5) in patients with COPD in a laboratory setting against a gold standard measurement of RR.

Methods and results Five RR monitors identified in the literature were selected for validation against RR measured with a gold standard method (Oxycon mobile, Carefusion) in 23 patients with COPD (13 males, age 70 ± 8.3 years, FEV1 58.3 ± 17.1%pred) during a 52 min protocol of a total of 19 activities of daily living (i.e sitting, standing, walking at different speeds, climbing stairs, lifting objects and sweeping the floor). Patients wore simultaneously the five monitors and the Oxycon mobile and RR was recorded breath by breath and averaged by minute. One minute of each activity was selected for analysis using Bland and Altman plots. Bias and limit of agreement (LoA) was established for each monitor (Figure 1). Bias and LoA for the five monitors were the following (M1 2.15 (-17.9 to 22.2), M2 3.1 (-8.7 to 14.9), M3 2.2 (-12.12 to 16.6), M4 -2.5 (-11.7 to 6.8) and M5 -1.9 (-10.8 to 6.9)). Patients were compliant with the use of the five monitors.

Conclusions Monitoring RR is feasible and non-intrusive in patients with COPD. We have identified two monitors (M4 and M5) with the lowest bias and the narrower LoA. These monitors will be further investigated in a home setting.

Funded by the Chief Scientific Office, CZH/4/826.

Abstract M146 Figure 1

Bland and Altman plots for RR between all five monitors and Oxycon Mobile

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.