Improvement of Body Posture Changes Detection During Ambulatory Respiratory Measurements Using Impedance Pneumography Signals

  • Marcel MłyńczakEmail author
  • Gerard Cybulski
Conference paper
Part of the IFMBE Proceedings book series (IFMBE, volume 57)


Impedance pneumography could be used for measuring respiratory parameters quantitatively in ambulatory conditions. It was noted that body posture affects the calibration coefficient connecting the measured impedance values and their first derivatives with volume and flow reference signals. Standard techniques for automatic detection of body posture and activity usually require additional motion sensors. However, in terms of the measurement comfort, less number of sensors is needed. Single sensor mounted on the chest provides good results, however its accuracy decreases during frequent changes of body posture. The aim of this study was to assess the possibility to detect body posture changes using the impedance signal itself, without any other devices or the active cooperation of the person being studied and prospectively improving the body posture change detection method using single motion sensor (e.g. 3D accelerometer). Fifteen healthy students (11 males) performed two body posture changes - get-ups and stand-ups. Six classification techniques were checked for prediction accuracy. It was found that artificial neural networks provided the best overall accuracy (90%).


Impedance pneumography Ambulatory respiratory monitoring Motion tracking Machine learning 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ghafar-Zadeh E (2015) Wireless Integrated Biosensors for Point-of-Care Diagnostic Applications. Sensors 15/2:3236-3261Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yao Q, Tian Y, Li PF, Tian LL, Qian YM, Li YS (2015) Design and Development of a Medical Big Data Processing System Based on Ha-doop. Journal of Medical Systems 39/23/3Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Seppa VP, Viik J, Hyttinen J (2010) Assessment of Pulmonary Flow Using Impedance Pneumography. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 57/9:2277–2285Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Młyńczak M, Niewiadomski W, Żyliński M, Cybulski G (2015) Verification of the Respiratory Parameters Derived from Impedance Pneumography during Normal and Deep Breathing in Three Body Postures. MBEC IFMBE Proceedings 45:881-884Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Młyńczak M, Niewiadomski W, Żyliński M, Cybulski G (2015) Ability to Determine Dynamic Respiratory Parameters Evaluated during Forced Vital Capacity Maneuver Using Impedance Pneumography. MBEC IFMBE Proceedings 45:877-880Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Houtveen JH, Groot PFC, de Geus EJC (2006) Validation of the thoracic impedance derived respiratory signal using multilevel analysis. Elsevier 59:97-106Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Foerster F, Smeja M, Fahrenberg J (1999) Detection of posture and motion by accelerometry: A validation study in ambulatory monitoring. Computers in Human Behavior 15:571-583Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tapia E, Intille S, Larson K (2004) Activity recognition in the home using simple and ubiquitous sensors. Proc. of 2nd International Conference on Pervasive Computing 158-175Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Busser HJ, Ott J, van Lummel RC, Uiterwaal M, Blank R (1997) Ambulatory monitoring of children’s activity. Medical Engineering & Physics 19/5:440-445Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bouten C, Sauren A, Verduin M, Janssen J (1997) Effects of placement and orientation of body-fixed accelerometers on the assessment of energy expenditure during walking. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing 35:50-56Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fruin M, Rankin J (2004) Validity of a multi-sensor armband in estimating rest and exercise energy expenditure. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 36:1063-1069Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bouten CVC, Koekkoek KTM, Verduin M, Kodde R, Janssen JD (1997) A triaxial accelerometer and portable data processing unit for the assessment of daily physical activity. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 44:136-147Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ermes M, Parkka J, Mantyjarvi J, Korhonen I (2008) Detection of Daily Activities and Sports With Wearable Sensors in Controlled and Uncontrolled Conditions. IEEE Transactions on Information Tech- nology in Biomedicine 12/1:20-26Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dargent-Molina P, Favier F, Grandjean H, Baudoin C, Schott A, Hausherr E, Meunier P, Breart G (1996) Fall-related factors and risk of hip fracture: The EPIDOS prospective study. Lancet 348:145-149Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Godfrey A, Conway R, Meagher D, OLaighin G (2008) Direct measurement of human movement by accelerometry, Medical Engineering & Physics 30:1364-1386Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang Z (2012) Microsoft Kinect Sensor and Its Effect. IEEE Multi Media 19/2:4-10Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sitnik S, Witkowski M (2008) Locating and tracing of anatomical landmarks based on full-field four-dimensional measurement of human body surface. Journal of Biomedical Optics 13/4:044039-1-044039-11Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Karantonis DM, Narayanan MR, Mathie M, Lovell N, Celler B (2006) Implementation of a Real-Time Human Movement Classifier Using a Triaxial Accelerometer for Ambulatory Monitoring. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 10/1:156-167Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mathie MJ, Coster ACF, Lovell NH, Celler BG (2003) Detection of daily physical activities using a triaxial accelerometer. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing 41:296-301Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fahrenberg J, Foerster F, Smeja M, Mueller W (1997) Assessment of posture and motion by multichannel piezoresistive accelerometer recordings. Psychophysiology 34:607-612Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Balogun JA, Amusa LO, Onyewadume IU (1988) Factors affecting caltrac and calcount accelerometers output. Physical Therapy 68:1500-1504Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hagan MT, Menhaj MB (1994) Training Feedforward Networks with the Marquardt Algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 5/6:989-993Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Meyer D, Dimitriadou E, Hornik K, Weingessel A, Leisch F, Chang CC, Lin CC (2014) e1071: Misc Functions of the Department of Statistics. URL
  24. 24.
    Therneau T, Atkinson B, Ripley B (2015) rpart: Recursive Partitioning and Regression Trees. URL
  25. 25.
    Ridgeway G (2003) gbm: Generalized Boosted Regression Models. URL
  26. 26.
    Liaw A, Wiener M (2002) Classification and Regression by randomForest. R News 2/3:18-22Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kuhn M (2008) Building Predictive Models in R Using the caret Package. Journal of Statistical Software, vol. 28, Issue 5, 2008.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Młyńczak M, Niewiadomski W, Żyliński M, Cybulski G (2014) Ambulatory impedance pneumography device for quantitative monitoring of volumetric parameters in respiratory and cardiac applications. Computing in Cardiology 41:965-968Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Seppa VP, Hyttinen J, Uitto M, Chrapek W, Viik J (2013) Novel electrode configuration for highly linear impedance pneumography. Biomed Tech 58/1:35-38Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Peng H, Long F, Ding C (2005) Feature selection based on mutual information: criteria of max-dependency, max-relevance, and min-redundancy. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 27/8:1226-1238Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Metrology and Biomedical Engineering, Department of MechatronicsWarsaw University of TechnologyWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Department of Applied PhysiologyMossakowski Medical Research Centre, PASWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations