Sources of error in bioimpedance spectroscopy

Two different makes of bioimpedance spectrometer (UniQuest-SEAC SFB-3 and Xitron 4000B) were used for a series of measurements on volunteers and patients in intensive care. Although each machine was accurate over the frequency range 5 to 500 kHz when bench tested on model resistor-capacitor circuits...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Physiological measurement 1998-05, Vol.19 (2), p.235-245
Hauptverfasser: Bolton, M P, Ward, L C, Khan, A, Campbell, I, Nightingale, P, Dewit, O, Elia, M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Two different makes of bioimpedance spectrometer (UniQuest-SEAC SFB-3 and Xitron 4000B) were used for a series of measurements on volunteers and patients in intensive care. Although each machine was accurate over the frequency range 5 to 500 kHz when bench tested on model resistor-capacitor circuits, significant differences in their recorded impedance parameters appeared when used in vivo, especially on intensive care patients. A series of laboratory tests was performed on each machine simulating the situation in vivo to identify possible reasons for these differences. Whilst stray capacitance in the environment was identified as the major contributor to variability in high-frequency performance, interaction between electrode impedance and lead positioning was also a factor. The observed phase shift with frequency or time delay (Td) used in the Xitron modeling software appears to be the result of a time constant caused by stray capacitance and so is unlikely to have any biological meaning. Significant differences in the in vivo numerical values produced by bioimpedance spectrometers may be attributed to instrument design, data processing and, in particular, the clinical environment.
ISSN:0967-3334
1361-6579
DOI:10.1088/0967-3334/19/2/011