Embedded Colour- and Electrodermal-Based Pressure Injury Staging and Objective Pain Assessment System Powered by a Proton Battery

Wahmisari Priharti; Husneni Mukhtar; Dien Rahmawati; Nur Hidayah Ahmad

doi:10.35882/jeeemi.v8i4.1828

Wahmisari Priharti Advanced Biomedical Intelligent Engineering Laboratory, Biomedical & Healthcare Technology Center of Excellence, School of Electrical Engineering, Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3650-6607
Husneni Mukhtar Advanced Biomedical Intelligent Engineering Laboratory, Biomedical & Healthcare Technology Center of Excellence, School of Electrical Engineering, Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5629-3215
Dien Rahmawati Advanced Biomedical Intelligent Engineering Laboratory, Biomedical & Healthcare Technology Center of Excellence, School of Electrical Engineering, Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3983-0848
Nur Hidayah Ahmad Advanced Optical Materials Research Group, Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia Corresponding author: W. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6717-2534

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35882/jeeemi.v8i4.1828

Keywords: Pressure injury, stage classification, objective pain assessment, proton battery

Abstract

Pressure injury is a serious health concern among the elderly and individuals with restricted mobility and is often associated with pain that reduces quality of life. Conventional assessment relies on clinician visual inspection and subjective pain scales, which are difficult to apply to patients with limited communication abilities. Therefore, early identification, accurate stage classification and objective pain assessment are essential for effective clinical intervention. This study develops an embedded pressure injury stage classification and pain assessment system integrating a colour sensor and an electrodermal activity (EDA) sensor with a Rule-Based Decision Tree to classify pressure injuries into four clinical stages, powered by a six-cell 1.5 V proton battery pack as an alternative to conventional lithium-based power sources. The system achieved an overall accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score of 0.88, 0.89, 0.88, and 0.88, respectively. Skin Conductance Level (SCL) increased progressively from Stage 1 to Stage 3 and decreased at Stage 4, indicating a preliminary physiological pattern associated with injury severity. The battery pack maintained a stable output voltage of 9.1 V at an average current consumption of 279.9 mA, demonstrating its feasibility as an alternative power source. Because the thresholds were derived from 70 annotated Medetec images and validated on only two subjects with four injury sites (40 region-level measurements), the reported metrics should be interpreted as preliminary proof-of-concept rather than definitive clinical validation, and larger studies are needed for clinical confirmation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

S. Bhattacharya and R. K. Mishra, “Pressure ulcers: Current understanding and newer modalities of treatment,” Indian J Plast Surg, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 4–16, 2015, doi: 10.4103/0970-0358.155260.

S. R. H. Zaidi and S. Sharma, Pressure Ulcer. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing, 2025.

E. B. Jaul and M. Calderon-Margalit, “Systemic factors and mortality in elderly patients with pressure ulcers,” Int. Wound J., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 254–259, 2015.

E. Jaul, J. Barron, J. P. Rosenzweig, and et al., “An overview of co-morbidities and the development of pressure ulcers among older adults,” BMC Geriatr, vol. 18, p. 305, 2018, doi: 10.1186/s12877-018-0997-7.

S. Coleman et al., “Patient risk factors for pressure ulcer development: systematic review,” Int. J. Nurs. Stud., vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 974–1003, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.11.019.

Z. Razi-Chafi, M. Esmaeilpour-Bandboni, and Z. Salmalian, “Prevalence of pressure ulcer and its related factors in elderly patients hospitalized to teaching hospitals in East Guilan,” JCOMS, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 375–381, 2023.

L. E. Edsberg, J. M. Black, M. Goldberg, L. McNichol, L. Moore, and M. Sieggreen, “Revised National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Pressure Injury Staging System,” J. Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 585–597, 2016, doi: 10.1097/WON.0000000000000281.

L. E. Edsberg, J. Cox, K. Koloms, and C. A. VanGilder-Freese, “Implementation of Pressure Injury Prevention Strategies in Acute Care: Results From the 2018-2019 International Pressure Injury Prevalence Survey,” J. Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs., vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 211–219, 2022, doi: 10.1097/WON.0000000000000878.

J. M. Black et al., “Pressure ulcers: avoidable or unavoidable? Results of the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel consensus conference,” Ostomy Wound Manage., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 24–37, 2011.

S. Chou and et al., “Predictive Validity of the Braden Scale for Pressure Injury Risk in Different Clinical Settings: A Systematic Review,” Int. J. Nurs. Stud., vol. 118, 2021.

S. Gaspar and et al., “Reliability and Validity of the Braden Scale in Older Adults,” J. Wound Care, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 713–720, 2020.

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, “Pressure Ulcer Prevention and Treatment Protocol,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.ahrq.gov/patient-safety/settings/hospital/resource/pressureulcer/tool/pu7b.html

A. Mehicic, A. Burston, and P. Fulbrook, “Psychometric properties of the Braden scale to assess pressure injury risk in intensive care: A systematic review,” Intensive Crit. Care Nurs., vol. 83, p. 103686, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2024.103686.

Y. Lyu, Y.-L. Huang, Z.-Y. Li, and F. Lin, “Interventions and strategies to prevent medical device-related pressure injury in adult patients: A systematic review,” J. Clin. Nurs., vol. 32, no. 19–20, pp. 6863–6878, 2023, doi: 10.1111/jocn.16790.

S. Fryer, S. Caggiari, D. Major, D. L. Bader, and P. R. Worsley, “Continuous pressure monitoring of inpatient spinal cord injured patients: implications for pressure ulcer development,” Spinal Cord, vol. 61, pp. 111–118, 2023, doi: 10.1038/s41393-022-00841-7.

A. Burston, S. J. Miles, and P. Fulbrook, “Patient and carer experience of living with a pressure injury: A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies,” J. Clin. Nurs., vol. 32, no. 13–14, pp. 3233–3247, 2023, doi: 10.1111/jocn.16431.

H. P. Silva et al., “Prediction of Pressure Injury Incidence in ICU Patients Using Machine Learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.13687, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.13687

B. Aldughayfiq, F. Ashfaq, N. Z. Jhanjhi, and M. Humayun, “YOLO-Based Deep Learning Model for Pressure Ulcer Detection and Classification,” Healthcare, vol. 11, no. 9, p. 1222, 2023, doi: 10.3390/healthcare11091222.

M. Asare-Baiden et al., “A Feasibility Study of Thermography for Detecting Pressure Injuries Across Diverse Skin Tones,” medRxiv, p. 2024.10.14.24315465, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1101/2024.10.14.24315465.

A. Liu et al., “Development of a Deep Learning-Based Model for Pressure Injury Surface Assessment,” J. Clin. Nurs., vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 4246–4258, Oct. 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17645.

H. Kzl, A. Ylmaz, M. Demiral, U. Kaya, and R. Çakr, “Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Deep Learning Model in Detection and Classification of Pressure Injury,” Journal of Intensive Care Nursing, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 207–219, 2025, doi: 10.62111/ybhd.1749992.

W. Priharti, H. Mukhtar, I. M. P. Giriwara, I. M. A. Majesta, and W. A. B. Bimantara, “Design of Deep Learning-Based Pressure Injury Stage Classification Device,” Jurnal Rekayasa Elektrika, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 83–92, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.17529/jre.v21i2.41353.

K.-Y. Chang, C.-H. Lin, and M.-F. Tsai, “Edge-Based Deep Learning System for On-Device Pressure Ulcer Detection Using YOLOv8,” Applied Sciences, vol. 14, no. 16, p. 7124, 2024, doi: 10.3390/app14167124.

H. Lau, B. So, and K. Lai, “A Smartphone Application for Pressure Injury Assessment Using AI-Based Image Classification,” JMIR Form. Res., vol. 6, no. 10, p. e37411, 2022, doi: 10.2196/37411.

M. I. N. Isa, M. I. H. Sohaimy, and N. H. Ahmad, “Carboxymethyl cellulose plasticized polymer application as bio-material in solid-state hydrogen ionic cell,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 44, no. 16, pp. 8298–8306, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.01.180.

L. Zhang, C. Zhang, and E. J. Berg, “Mastering Proton Activities in Aqueous Batteries,” Advanced Materials, vol. 37, no. 23, p. 2407852, Jun. 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202407852.

C. Huang, W. Zhang, and W. Zheng, “Proton batteries shape the next energy storage,” Energy Storage Mater., vol. 61, p. 102913, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ensm.2023.102913.

B. Zhang and others, “Cathode materials for proton batteries: recent advances and perspectives,” J. Mater. Chem. A, vol. 13, pp. 18183–18208, 2025, doi: 10.1039/D5TA02851E.

Y. Zhong et al., “Design methodology of a promising category of metal phosphate electrodes for quasi-solid-state proton batteries,” Natl. Sci. Rev., vol. 12, no. 7, p. nwaf226, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwaf226.

B. Su et al., “Water-in-Acid Strategy for Corrosion-Free Proton Storage: Phosphoric Acid Electrolyte Engineering Toward Sustainable Aqueous Batteries,” Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., vol. 64, no. 25, p. e202505769, Jun. 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.202505769.

M. N. Faeqah, M. I. H. Sohaimy, N. H. Ahmad, M. Muthuvinayagam, and M. I. N. Isa, “Structural study of 2-hydroxyethyl cellulose (2HEC) solid biopolymer electrolyte doped with NH4Br: effect on ionic conductivity,” Ionics (Kiel)., vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 9133–9145, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s11581-025-06495-8.

N. H. Ahmad, M. N. H. Mahmud, and F. E. Zainuddin, “Carboxymethyl Cellulose Doped Ammonium Iodide Solid Biopolymer Electrolytes: Electrical and Structural Analysis,” International Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering & Sciences, 2025.

T. B. Reddy, Ed., Linden’s Handbook of Batteries, 4th ed. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2011.

K. V Mardia and P. E. Jupp, Directional Statistics. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2000.

J. Han, M. Kamber, and J. Pei, Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques, 3rd ed. Waltham, MA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann, 2012.

O. Karcioglu and others, “A Systematic Review of the Pain Scales in Adults: Which to Use?,” Am. J. Emerg. Med., vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 707–714, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2019.09.008.

R. Sánchez-Reolid, F. L. de la Rosa, D. Sánchez-Reolid, M. T. López, and A. Fernández-Caballero, “Machine Learning Techniques for Arousal Classification from Electrodermal Activity: A Systematic Review,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 22, p. 8886, 2022, doi: 10.3390/s22228886.

O. N. Rahma, A. P. Putra, A. Rahmatillah, and others, “Electrodermal Activity for Measuring Cognitive and Emotional Stress Level,” J. Med. Signals Sens., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 155–162, 2022, doi: 10.4103/jmss.JMSS_78_20.

M. Benedek and C. Kaernbach, “A continuous measure of phasic electrodermal activity,” J. Neurosci. Methods, vol. 190, no. 1, pp. 80–91, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.04.028.

Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, “Evaluation of Measurement Data – Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement,” Sèvres, France, 2008.

B. N. Kyle and D. W. McNeil, “Autonomic arousal and experimentally induced pain: A critical review of the literature,” Pain Res. Manag., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 159–167, 2014, doi: 10.1155/2014/536859.

S. Sugimine, S. Saito, and T. Takazawa, “Normalized skin conductance level could differentiate physical pain stimuli from other sympathetic stimuli,” Sci. Rep., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 10950, 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-67936-0.

P. Kyriacou and others, “Pain assessment using physiological responses/markers in different types of pain: a scoping review,” NPJ Digit. Med., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 64, 2025, doi: 10.1038/s41746-025-02241-6.

M. S. A. Rani, M. N. F. Norrrahim, V. F. Knight, N. M. Nurazzi, K. Abdan, and S. H. Lee, “A Review of Solid-State Proton–Polymer Batteries: Materials and Characterizations,” Polymers (Basel)., vol. 15, no. 19, 2023, doi: 10.3390/polym15194032.