BME100 s2014:T Group1 L3

From OpenWetWare

Jump to: navigation, search
BME 100 Fall 2013 Home
People
Lab Write-Up 1 | Lab Write-Up 2 | Lab Write-Up 3
Lab Write-Up 4 | Lab Write-Up 5 | Lab Write-Up 6
Course Logistics For Instructors
Photos
Wiki Editing Help
Image:BME494_Asu_logo.png

Contents

OUR TEAM

Name: Arianna Moreno
Name: Arianna Moreno
Name: Pritish Char
Name: Pritish Char
Name: Almoustafa Abbas
Name: Almoustafa Abbas
Name: Jared Smith
Name: Jared Smith
Name: Chris Joseph Ibarra
Name: Chris Joseph Ibarra

LAB 3A WRITE-UP

Descriptive Statistics


All Graphs Using Standard Deviation Bars
Image:Trial_1_HR.jpg Image:Trial_2_HR_.jpg Image:BP_Trial_1.jpg Image:Trial_2_BP.jpg Image:Temp_Comparison_Oral_and_Sensor.jpg Image:Temp_Over_Time.jpg Image:Temp_Change_1.jpg Image:Temp_Change_2.jpg

Units for the following graphs can be found in a key above each graph:
Data for Temperature Experiment:
Mean (degrees farenheit) Image:G1.jpg
Data for Blood Pressure Experiment:
Mean (mmHg) *only systolic measurements* Image:G2.jpg
Data for Heart Rate Experiment:
Mean (BPM) Image:G3.jpg
Heart Rate and Blood Pressure over time: Image:G4.jpg



Results

Temperature:
From the collected data, the standard oral device measured consistently throughout the experiment. It was expected to see lower temperature measurements when going outside because it was colder outside than inside. With the sensor, the data was inconsistent and jumped from very high to very low in many cases and was higher than usual in the last part of the experiment, consistent within that time frame but inaccurate with a large deviation in the data.

Blood Pressure:
In our experiment, it was shown that the standard cuff displayed more accurate data, holding closer to the expected value of systolic measurements of blood pressure. However, the data for the standard blood pressure cuff was inconsistent. This may be a result of the error encountered with the device. Because it constantly relayed an error message, the data fluctuated. The watch sensor seemed to remain very consistent throughout the experiment but was inaccurate. After the subject took a walk outside, the blood pressure was expected to show an abrupt increase and possibly a linear decrease; however the watch sensor only displayed an increase for one measurement then remained at the same place as before the walk. The standard deviation in blood pressure for the watch sensor, according to our data, shows that the watch sensor gives consistency. Our deviation for the blood pressure cuff was abnormally high and could be a result, again, from the error messages received.

Heart Rate:
The pulse oximeter shows a relatively consistent measurement of BPM and mirrored the expected results. The watch sensor, in comparison, did not relay accurate measurements of the subject's heart rate. While it did increase after the walk outside like expected, it was still very low compared to the standard and expected measurements. Both devices had a large deviation that could have effected the data.

Significant P-Values?

After T-Test
Temperature:
Oral thermometer & Temperature sensor

         In class start 1-5: no significance           Outside1-6: significant          In class finish1-5: significant

Blood Pressure:
Blood Pressure Cuff & Omron Watch Sensor

         In class start 1-5: no significance           Post-Walk 1-12: no significance

Heart Rate:
Pulse Oximeter & Omron Watch Sensor

         In class start 1-5: significant                  Post-Walk 1-12: significant

Analysis

From the class data, it can be seen that the temperature on the sensor for most groups was not an accurate measurement. Many groups had similar outcomes for the sensor in comparison to the gold standard. It can be seen that the standard oral method provides a successful measurement of temperature.

Looking for trends in the data, we can see that in the majority of groups, the watch sensor takes lower readings for both blood pressure and heart rate. This could be because the sensor part of the watch does not initially make contact with the skin. It is held just slightly off the skin by some hard plastic pieces. It also measures blood pressure using a different method than the cuff, making it faster and more ideal for everyday use.

If we compare the data from pre- and post-walk measurements, it is consistent in every case that blood pressure and pulse spiked immediately after the walk, and then slowly returned to pre-walk values. This was expected, but the watch sensor continued to generally pull lower results.

An article from an online source from Mayo Clinic states:

"Wrist blood pressure is extremely sensitive to body position; to get accurate reading when taking your blood pressure with a wrist monitor, your arm and wrist must be at heart level. even then, blood pressure taken at the wrist are usually higher and less accurate than those taken at your arm because your wrist arteries are narrower and not as deep under your skin as those in your forearm," http://www.mayoclinic.org).

Summary/Discussion

1) Observations for Sensor:
-There is no indication or “beep” to tell us when the reading is done
-Sensor kept disconnecting and Bluetooth connection was weak
-Fluctuation in temperature readings
- Uncomfortable under the armpit
- Not durable

Recommendations:
-Add an indicator of when the device is finished measuring -Measure the temperature in an easily accessible way rather than under the armpit to improve
accuracy and user-friendly productivity

Observation for Thermometer:
-Provides consistent reading
-Gives an indication when the reading is done

2) Outside Procedure:
-First 3 readings were taken in an environment with lower temperature
-The last 3 readings were also taken in an environment with lower temperature but with more movement and activity such as walking and jumping.

3) Observations for Blood pressure cuff:
-Kept giving error signal for every other time when used
-Rather uncomfortable for the patient as the pressure would continue to increase as it was trying to find a pulse
-Portable and battery operated

Recommendations:
-Improve the sensor technology so it can find the blood pressure reading faster with less errors

4)Observation for Watch Sensor:
-Very responsive and came out with consistent results
-However results tended to be inaccurate (lower than gold standard)

Recommendation:
-The sensor on the watch should be positioned closer to the wrist so that more accurate and consistent readings can be attained.

5)Observation for Pulse Oximeter:
-Comfortable however the clip design seems rather flimsy and “cheap”
-Grip component was not very strong either, and kept slipping off
Recommendations:
-Improver gripping so that it does not slide off




LAB 3B WRITE-UP

Target Population and Need

Target population: The target population for this device is typically the general population. This device acts as an early detection (ED) for cardiovascular disease and cancer(specifically pancreatic, oral, and breast cancer). While individuals with family history and/or positive genome markers are usually more prone to these problems, this device is targeted at the adult population ranging from 18-85 years of age.
Needs : Since the increase in cancer over the past few decades, people need and want to become more aware of cancer and how it can affect themselves or their families. Early diagnosis of cancer and various other diseases such as cardiovascular health problems could radically improve the recovery rate. This device offers early warning for such health problems to improve recovery rate and ease the process of the tedious doctor's visits and blood samples.

Device Design

Image:Diagram1.jpg

Image:Diagram2.jpg

Image:Super_Cool_Logo.jpg


Device Slogan: Spit it out!




Inferential Statistics

Image:Table_3.jpg
Image:Table_1.jpg
Image:Table_2.jpg

Graph

Image:BME_Fake_Data_CD_Graph.jpg

Image: BME_Fake_Data_Neoplasm_Graph.jpg



Personal tools