Novel device for monitoring respiratory rate during endoscopy-A thermodynamic sensor

Table 1 Patient characteristics

Patient	Age	Sex	Weight in kg	Height in cm	BMI in kg/m2	ASA class	Sleep apnea	Included
1	70	Male	96.6	168	34.4	III	Yes	Yes
2	51	Female	79.4	165	29.1	II	No	No
3	61	Female	99.8	168	35.5	II	Yes	No
4	90	Male	72.6	163	27.5	II	No	Yes
5	51	Male	95.3	170	32.9	III	No	Yes
6	71	Male	145.2	191	40	IV	Yes	Yes
7	65	Male	108.0	180	33.2	III	No	Yes
8	51	Female	96.2	152	41.4	III	Yes	No
9	65	Male	115.7	175	37.7	II	No	Yes
10	47	Male	79.4	175	25.8	I	No	Yes
11	41	Female	64.0	157	25.8	III	No	Yes
12	77	Female	65.8	157	26.5	III	No	No

BMI: Body mass index; ASA class: American Society of Anesthesiologists classification.

Table 2 Procedure data

Patient	Procedure	Date	RR	O2 Sat%	HR	BP inmmHg	Sedationused	Included
1	EGD	6/13/16	20	97	87	145/78	Conscious	Yes
2	Colonoscopy	6/13/16	18	100	68	159/93	Conscious	No
3	Colonoscopy	6/13/16	19	97	87	139/73	Conscious	No
4	Colonoscopy	6/13/16	18	97	79	142/74	Conscious	Yes
5	EGD	6/14/16	18	98	76	133/80	Conscious	Yes
6	Colonoscopy	6/16/16	16	92	64	151/92	MAC	Yes
7	EGD	6/16/16	16	98	70	155/81	MAC	Yes
8	EUS	6/16/16	16	98	59	120/61	MAC	No
9	Colonoscopy	7/25/16	20	97	55	133/74	Conscious	Yes
10	Colonoscopy	7/25/16	16	99	64	117/67	Conscious	Yes
11	Colonoscopy	7/26/16	18	99	55	111/62	MAC	Yes
12	EGD/ Colonoscopy	7/26/16	16	98	77	177/107	MAC	No

RR: Respiratory rate; O₂ sat.: Oxygen saturation; BP: Blood pressure; EGD: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy; MAC: Monitored anesthesia care.

Table 3 Comparison of measured respiratory rate between capnography and LRMD

Subject	Capnostream, mean ± SD	Linshom, mean ± SD	Capnostream–Linshom (95%CI)	Pearson’s Correlation1 (95%CI)
1	14.9 ± 1.9	15.3 ± 2.1	-0.46 (-0.50, -0.42)	0.41 (0.40, 0.43)
4	15.6 ± 2.6	15.8 ± 3.3	-0.21 (-0.25, -0.17)	0.62 (0.61, 0.63)
5	25.1 ± 4.2	26.6 ± 2.9	-1.4 (-1.5, -1.3)	0.61 (0.60, 0.62)
6	7.9 ± 5.8	8.4 ± 5.2	-0.52 (-0.56, -0.48)	0.72 (0.72, 0.73)
7	23.1 ± 2.7	23.3 ± 4.4	-0.21 (-0.28, -0.14)	0.27 (0.25, 0.28)
9	13.2 ± 3.3	12.9 ± 3.4	0.37 (0.35, 0.39)	0.84 (0.84, 0.84)
10	15.7 ± 3.0	15.0 ± 3.6	0.76 (0.74, 0.78)	0.76 (0.75, 0.76)
11	15.8 ± 1.5	15.5 ± 1.7	0.26 (0.24, 0.27)	0.65 (0.64, 0.65)

¹We did not use a concordance correlation coefficient because of the known differences on how the devices measure respiratory rate. CI: Confidence interval.

Table 4 Comparison of apnea events reported by Capnostream and Linshom devices

Subject	Capnostream	Linshom	Capnostream–Linshom (95%CI)
1	0	0	--
4	0	1.4 (1.4, 1.4)	-1.4 (-1.4, -1.4)
5	0	0	--
6	30.3 (29.9, 30.8)	23.3 (23.0, 23.7)	7.0 (6.7, 7.3)
7	0	0.81 (0.81, 0.81)	-0.81 (-0.81, -0.81)
9	4.8 (4.6, 5.0)	5.1 (4.9, 5.3)	-0.30 (-0.40, -0.20))
10	0.83 (0.76, 0.91)	1.8 (1.7, 1.9)	-0.93 (-1.03, -0.84)
11	0	0	--

CI: Confidence interval.