Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation. 1955;11:228-239

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by DEUCHAR, D. C.
Right arrow Articles by SCARBOROUGH, W. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by DEUCHAR, D. C.
Right arrow Articles by SCARBOROUGH, W. R.

(Circulation. 1955;11:228.)
© 1955 American Heart Association, Inc.


Some Observations on the Relation of the High-Frequency Bed Ballistocardiogram to that Obtained from an Aperiodic Bed

DENNIS C. DEUCHAR M.D.,M.R.C.P.1; SAMUEL A. TALBOT PH.D.1; W. R. SCARBOROUGH M.D.1

1 From the Department of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and Hospital, Baltimore,Md.

A previous analysis of the mechanical behavior of current ballistocardiographic systems allowed the prediction of certain relationships between records from the Starr high-frequency bed and those representing undistorted forces applied to the body by the cardiovascular "generator." The latter were obtained by recording the acceleration of an "aperiodic mercury bed" platform. A relationship between the form of these two types of records from 80 subjects was sought. In varying types of normal and abnormal records the predicted relationship between the two different kinds of ballistocardiograms was consistently observed. It is concluded that records from the high-frequency bed grossly reflect the slower forces applied to the body, but are distorted with respect to phase, amplitude and frequency content, this being due in part to the elastic properties of the dorsal surface of the body and in part to the weight and stiffness of the platform support.