Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026
Change in pulse wave transit time measured using ear plethysmography is a useful substitute for finger plethysmography.
Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePlethysmography using the finger is affected by various clinical conditions, including sympathetic tone. This study aimed to evaluate whether pulse wave transit time (PWTT) calculated using ear plethysmography could be used as a substitute for finger PWTT.
methodsIn this prospective observational study, 50 patients underwent elective hepatectomy between December 2021 and April 2022. PWTT was simultaneously measured using finger and ear plethysmography. The primary outcome was the global agreement of all PWTT measurements. The secondary outcome was trending ability during hemodynamic changes.
resultsIn total, 311 paired readings from 50 patients were collected. PWTT-ear was shorter than PWTT (68.1 ± 15.1 ms). For the percent change in PWTT from baseline (%ΔPWTT), linear regression analyses showed a strong correlation between %ΔPWTT-ear and %ΔPWTT (r = 0.85, P < 0.001). In Bland-Altman analyses, the bias between %ΔPWTT-ear and %ΔPWTT was - 0.04% and limits of agreement from - 0.17 to 0.17%, with a percentage error (2 standard deviation/mean %ΔPWTT) of 4.2%. The conductance rate of the two methods was 95.9% based on a four-quadrant plot analysis. The angular conductance rate was 98.9% with a radial limit of ± 25.3 based on a polar plot analysis.
conclusionPWTT-ear was shorter than PWTT, but the % change in PWTT-ear was similar to that in PWTT. PWTT measured using ear plethysmography can be used as a substitute for measuring changes in PWTT.
trial registrationThis study was registered in the UMIN-CTR Clinical Database (ID: UMIN000045950), https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/icdr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000052326 on December 08, 2021.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.