Search

Objective: Investigators conducted pilot sessions in live Emergency Department (ED) settings to prepare for formal comparative study of contact and experimental non-contact vital signs (VS) measurement devices. Methods: Contact-based cardiorespiratory monitors (CM) and video photoplethysmography (vPPG) measured heart rates (HR); contact thermometers and passive infrared thermography (pIR) obtained core and surface temperatures. Subject VS data comprised two 25-min CM and vPPG recordings (initial unprimed “Triage Check” window; four 1-min “Full Check” windows; 20min of “Resting” intervals) and temperature measurements. Results: Forty-eight of 102 approached patients participated: at least 5 subjects each in 0-12mo, 1-5y, 6-12y, 13-17y age-groups, and at least 2 subjects each in 18-29y, 30-39y, 40-49y, 50-59y, 60-69y, 70-79y, 80+y age-groups. Subjects were 40.4% female with median Fitzpatrick skin type of 3.0 (interquartile range 1-3: 2.0-5.0), ESI score of 3.0 (2.0-3.0), and core temperature of 98.6°F (97.9-99.1°F). Twelve subjects were excluded from vPPG analysis due to inadequate lighting, excessive motion, and/or datastream loss. From the remaining 36 subjects with median HR CM of 78.2bpm (69.8-94.8bpm), vPPG measured median HR vPPG of 75.0bpm (68.3-93.0bpm) from 170 (70.5%) of 241 possible Full Check windows; the median difference between HR CM and HR vPPG was 0.6bpm (-0.2-2.3bpm). All Emergency Severity Index (ESI) HR components for 34 subjects with Triage Check HR vPPG measurements matched CM-based ESI HR components. Median differences between contact and pIR temperatures ranged from −5.4°F to −4.4°F. Conclusion: vPPG and pIR devices experimentally measured select live VS with promising results. Significance: Pilot data and protocol testing set the groundwork for full-scale ED vPPG-pIR investigation.