Key result
HRV markers LF and VLF show no correlation with electrodermal reactivity, failing to reflect sympathetic modulation.
Why the study?
Despite strong reservations regarding the validity of several heart rate variability measures, they continue to be used in recent studies.
Does the reactivity of ostensible sympathetic HRV markers (LF and VLF) correlate with electrodermal activity (EDA) in response to cognitive and orthostatic stress?
Observational
Does the reactivity of ostensible sympathetic HRV markers (LF and VLF) correlate with electrodermal activity (EDA) in response to cognitive and orthostatic stress?
Commonly used sympathetic HRV markers (LF, VLF) do not represent cardiac sympathetic modulation, and HRV linear analysis should be restricted to determining vagal influences.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Does not support LF/VLF as sympathetic markers; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change clinical HRV interpretation.
BACKGROUND: Despite strong reservations regarding the validity of a number of heart rate variability (HRV) measures, these are still being used in recent studies. AIMS: We aimed to compare the reactivity of ostensible sympathetic HRV markers (low and very low frequency [LF and VLF]) to that of electrodermal activity (EDA), an exclusively sympathetic marker, in response to cognitive and orthostatic stress, investigate the possibility of LF as a vagal-mediated marker of baroreflex modulation, and compare the ability of HRV markers of parasympathetic function (root mean square of successive differences [RMSSD] and high frequency [HF]) to quantify vagal reactivity to cognitive and orthostatic stress. RESULTS: None of the purported sympathetic HRV markers displayed a reactivity that correlated with electrodermal reactivity. LF (ms2) reactivity correlated with the reactivity of both RMSSD and HF during baroreflex modulation. RMSSD and HF indexed the reactivity of the parasympathetic nervous system under conditions of normal breathing; however, RMSSD performed better as a marker of vagal activity when the task required breathing changes. CONCLUSIONS: Neither LF (in ms2 or normalized units [nu]) nor VLF represent cardiac sympathetic modulation of the heart. LF (ms2) may reflect vagally mediated baroreflex cardiac effects. HRV linear analysis therefore appears to be restricted to the determination of vagal influences on heart rate. With regard to HRV parasympathetic markers, this study supports the suggestion that HRV frequency domain analyses, such as HF, should not be used as an index of vagal activity in study tasks where verbal responses are required, as these responses may induce respiratory changes great enough to distort HF power.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thomas et al. (2019) reported an observational. Heart rate variability (HRV) markers vs. Electrodermal activity (EDA) was evaluated on Correlation of HRV markers (LF, VLF) with electrodermal activity during cognitive and orthostatic stress. Heart rate variability markers LF and VLF did not correlate with electrodermal reactivity during cognitive and orthostatic stress, indicating they do not reflect sympathetic modulation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: