↓ Skip to main content

Detection of intraneural needle-placement with multiple frequency bioimpedance monitoring: a novel method

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
17 patents

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Detection of intraneural needle-placement with multiple frequency bioimpedance monitoring: a novel method
Published in
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10877-015-9698-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Håvard Kalvøy, Axel R. Sauter

Abstract

Electrical impedance measurements have been used to detect intraneural needle placement, but there is still a lack of precision with this method. The purpose of the study was to develop a method for the discrimination of nerve tissue from other tissue types based on multiple frequency impedance measurements. Impedance measurements with 25 different frequencies between 1.26 and 398 kHz were obtained in eight pigs while placing the tip of a stimulation needle within the sciatic nerve and in other tissues. Various impedance variables and measurement frequencies were tested for tissue discrimination. Best tissue discrimination was obtained by using three different impedance parameters with optimal measurement frequencies: Modulus (126 kHz), Phase angle (40 kHz) and the Delta of the phase angle (between 126 and 158 kHz). These variables were combined in a Compound variable C. The area under the curve in a receiver operating characteristic was consecutively increased for the Modulus (78 %), Phase angle (86 %), Delta of the phase angle (94 %), and the Compound variable C (97 %), indicating highest specificity and sensitivity for C. An algorithm based on C was implemented in a real-time feasibility test and used in an additional test animal to demonstrate our new method. Discrimination between nerve tissue and other tissue types was improved by combining several impedance variables at multiple measurement frequencies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 22%
Researcher 8 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Professor 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 16 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Unknown 9 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 December 2023.
All research outputs
#5,948,565
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#134
of 698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,196
of 265,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 698 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,800 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.