Comparison of lung sound transducers using a bioacoustic transducer testing system
Comparison of lung sound transducers using a bioacoustic transducer testing system
复制标题
DOI：
10.1152/japplphysiol.00273.2006
复制
发表时间：
2006-08-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Pasterkamp, Hans
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kraman, Steve S.;Wodicka, George R.;Pasterkamp, Hans
使用生物声换能器测试系统比较肺声换能器。J Appl Physiol 101：469 - 476，2006.首次发表于2006年4月20日; doi：10.1152/japplphysiol.00273.2006。- 用于肺音研究的传感器通常由研究者设计或改编自相关领域使用的设备。它们的相对特征从未被定义。我们采用了一个人造胸壁与粘弹性表面和一个白色噪声信号发生器作为一个稳定的声源比较的频率响应和脉冲波形再现的选择用于肺音研究的设备。我们使用频谱估计技术来确定脉冲的频率响应和互相关，以确定脉冲形状保真度。评估的传感器是Siemens EMT 25 C加速度计（Siemens）; PPG 201加速度计（PPG）;具有空气耦合器的Sony ECM-T150驻极体电容麦克风（空气耦合器;具有直径为5-、10-和15-mm的圆柱形空气室和直径为10- mm的圆锥形空气室）;连接到驻极体电容器麦克风的Littman经典听诊器头（Littman）;和Andries Tek（Andries）电子听诊器。我们发现，空气耦合器腔室的大小和形状对检测到的声音没有重要影响。Siemens、空气耦合器和Littman的性能相似，频率响应相对平坦，从200 Hz到1，200 Hz。PPG具有最宽的频率响应，有用的灵敏度扩展到4，000 Hz。Andries的频率响应在1,000 Hz以上是最差的。再现脉冲的精度大致与传感器的高频灵敏度相对应。我们的结论是，常用的肺音传感器之间有重要的差异，必须定义，以允许从不同的实验室的数据进行比较。
Comparison of lung sound transducers using a bioacoustic transducer testing system. J Appl Physiol 101: 469 - 476, 2006. First published April 20, 2006; doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00273.2006. - Sensors used for lung sound research are generally designed by the investigators or adapted from devices used in related fields. Their relative characteristics have never been defined. We employed an artificial chest wall with a viscoelastic surface and a white noise signal generator as a stable source of sound to compare the frequency response and pulse waveform reproduction of a selection of devices used for lung sound research. We used spectral estimation techniques to determine frequency response and cross-correlation of pulses to determine pulse shape fidelity. The sensors evaluated were the Siemens EMT 25 C accelerometer (Siemens); PPG 201 accelerometer (PPG); Sony ECM-T150 electret condenser microphone with air coupler (air coupler; with cylindrical air chambers of 5-, 10-, and 15-mm diameter and conical air chamber of 10- mm diameter); Littman classic stethoscope head (Littman) connected to an electret condenser microphone; and the Andries Tek (Andries) electronic stethoscope. We found that the size and shape of the air coupler chamber to have no important effect on the detected sound. The Siemens, air coupler, and Littman performed similarly with relatively flat frequency responses from 200 to 1,200 Hz. The PPG had the broadest frequency response, with useful sensitivity extending to 4,000 Hz. The Andries' frequency response was the poorest above 1,000 Hz. Accuracy in reproducing pulses roughly corresponded with the high-frequency sensitivity of the sensors. We conclude that there are important differences among commonly used lung sound sensors that have to be defined to allow the comparison of data from different laboratories.