September 14, 2016Open Access

Heart Rate Variability Estimation with Joint Accelerometer and Gyroscope Sensing

Q: What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Observational. Population: Healthy (n=29). Intervention: 6-axis autocorrelation (6-AC) using joint SCG/GCG vs. 1-axis autocorrelation (1-AC). Primary outcome: Mean error of Mean RR interval (ms) compared to ECG.

Key Result

The 6-axis autocorrelation method combining accelerometer and gyroscope data reduced the mean error of Mean RR interval estimation to 2.23 ms compared to 3.36 ms with the single-axis method.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=29)

Multicenter

Structured PICO

Does joint accelerometer and gyroscope sensing (6-AC) improve heart rate variability estimation compared to single-axis sensing (1-AC) in healthy male volunteers?

Population

29 healthy male volunteers aged 23-41 years evaluated in a supine position for heart rate variability estimation.

Intervention

Joint seismocardiography (SCG) and gyrocardiography (GCG) using a 3-axis accelerometer and 3-axis gyroscope with multi-axes autocorrelation analysis (6-AC)

Comparator

Single-axis autocorrelation (1-AC) and simultaneous electrocardiography (ECG) as reference

Outcome

Mean error of heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) parameters compared to ECGsurrogate

Joint accelerometer and gyroscope sensing using a 6-axis autocorrelation method improves the accuracy of heart rate variability estimation compared to single-axis sensing, offering a promising approach for wearable devices.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 2.2278% vs 3.3608%

Limitations

Small sample size of 29 subjects
Only male subjects included
Subjects were required to remain still in a supine position
Algorithm may misinterpret intervals if weak signal peaks occur between higher amplitude peaks

Abstract

This paper describes a method for estimation of heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) with accelerometers and gyroscopes. We denote this joint seismocardiography (SCG) and gyrocardiography (GCG) approach as SCG/GCG. In principle, SCG which is a well known method measures the linear mechanical movements of the heart and GCG is a new technique which measures angular motion due to the chest micro-vibrations caused by myocardial rotation. As electrocardiography (ECG), they can also be performed in non-invasive manner using a device in contact to subjects skin, for example. Our method extracts HRV parameters based on single-axis and multi-axes autocorrelation analysis (1-AC and 6-AC) of all simultaneously captured SCG/GCG axes. The results of each axes are combined to maintain reliable HR-and HRV. We validate our results with a comparison study between simultaneous ECG and SCG/GCG recordings using a study group of 29 healthy male volunteers. The study provides a promising approach for HRV estimation with modern wearable devices.

AIに質問

Bookmark

View Full Paper

AIに質問

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Lahdenoja et al. (Wed,) conducted a observational in Healthy (n=29). 6-axis autocorrelation (6-AC) using joint SCG/GCG vs. 1-axis autocorrelation (1-AC) was evaluated on Mean error of Mean RR interval (ms) compared to ECG. The 6-axis autocorrelation method combining accelerometer and gyroscope data reduced the mean error of Mean RR interval estimation to 2.23 ms compared to 3.36 ms with the single-axis method.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1ff1423f3a87967f2e5c08 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22489/cinc.2016.209-166

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: