Although two modes of elastic tube (ET) and vascular elasticity (VE) have been well explored for cuffless continuous blood pressure (BP) monitoring estimation, the initial calibration with these two models could be derived from different mathematical mechanisms for BP estimation. The study is aimed at evaluating the performance of VE and ET models by means of an advanced point-to-point (aPTP) pairing calibration. The cuff BPs were only taken up while the signals of PPG and ECG were synchronously acquired from individual subjects. Two popular VE models together with one representative ET model were designated to study aPTP as a unified assessment criterion. The VE model has demonstrated the stronger correlation of 0.89 and 0.86 of SBP and DBP, respectively, and the lower estimated BP error of (4.55) mmHg and (3.38) mmHg of SBP and DBP, respectively, than the ET model. With the ET model, there is a significant difference between the methods of conventional least-square (LS) calibration and aPTP calibration (). These results showed that the VE model surpasses the ET model under the same uniform calibration. The outcome has been unveiled that the selection of initial calibration methods was vital to work out diastolic BP with the ET model. The study revealed an evident fact about initial sensitivity between the modes of different BP estimation and initial calibration.

中文翻译：

---

具有弹性管和血管弹性模式的更好的无袖带血压估计的统一校准范例

尽管已经对无袖式连续血压（BP）监测估算方法探索了弹性管（ET）和血管弹性（VE）两种模式，但使用这两种模型进行的初始校准可以从不同的BP估算数学机制中得出。该研究旨在通过高级点对点（aPTP）配对校准来评估VE和ET模型的性能。袖带BP仅在从个体受试者同步获取PPG和ECG信号的同时进行。指定了两个流行的VE模型以及一个代表性的ET模型来研究aPTP作为统一的评估标准。VE模型已证明SBP和DBP的相关性分别为0.89和0.86，而BP的估计误差较低。 （4.55）毫米汞柱和 与ET模型相比，SBP和DBP分别为（3.38）mmHg。对于ET模型，传统的最小二乘（LS）校准和aPTP校准的方法之间存在显着差异（）。这些结果表明，在相同的统一校准下，VE模型优于ET模型。结果表明，选择初始校准方法对于用ET模型计算舒张压至关重要。该研究揭示了一个明显的事实，即关于不同BP估计和初始校准模式之间的初始灵敏度。