Key result
Sternal measurement location alters seismocardiography time interval estimates despite strong heart rate correlation with ECG.
Why the study?
SCG signals exhibit distinct spectrotemporal characteristics across chest locations, prompting this study to explore how sensor location affects the estimation of SCG-based CTIs.
Does SCG measurement location affect the estimation of SCG-based cardiac time intervals compared to ECG in healthy adults?
Cross-Sectional (n=14)
Does SCG measurement location affect the estimation of SCG-based cardiac time intervals compared to ECG in healthy adults?
Effect estimate: R2 0.9930, 0.9968, 0.9790
SCG-based cardiac time intervals vary significantly depending on the sensor location on the sternum, highlighting the need for standardized measurement protocols.
SCG sternal location affects time-interval estimates; standardization required before clinical use, with optimal site left open for validation.
Cardiac time intervals (CTIs) are important parameters for evaluating cardiac function and can be measured noninvasively through electrocardiography (ECG) and seismocardiography (SCG). SCG signals exhibit distinct spectrotemporal characteristics when acquired from various locations on the chest. Thus, this study aimed to explore how SCG measurement location affects the estimation of SCG-based CTIs. ECG and SCG signals were acquired from 14 healthy adults, with three accelerometers placed on the top, middle, and bottom of the sternum. A custom-built algorithm was developed to estimate heart rates (HRs) from ECG (HRECG) and SCG (HRSCG) signals. Moreover, SCG fiducial points and CTIs, including aortic valve opening and closure, R-R interval, pre-ejection period, left ventricular ejection time, and electromechanical systole, were estimated from the SCG signals at different sternal locations. The average and correlation coefficient (R2) of the CTIs and HRs derived from all three locations were compared, along with the analysis of mean differences for the CTIs and their corresponding sensor locations. The results indicated strong correlations between HRECG and HRSCG, with average R2 values of 0.9930, 0.9968, and 0.9790 for the top, middle, and bottom sternal locations, respectively. Additionally, the study demonstrated that SCG-based CTIs varied depending on the SCG measurement locations. In conclusion, these findings underscore the importance of establishing consistent protocols for reporting CTIs based on SCG. Furthermore, they call for further investigation to compare estimated CTIs with gold-standard methods like echocardiography to identify the best SCG measurement location for accurate CTI estimations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mann et al. (2023) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy adults (n=14). Seismocardiography (SCG) at different sternal locations vs. Electrocardiography (ECG) was evaluated on Heart rate correlation (R2) and cardiac time intervals (R2 0.9930, 0.9968, 0.9790). Seismocardiography measurement location on the sternum significantly affected cardiac time interval estimates, despite strong heart rate correlations with ECG (R2 0.9790 to 0.9968).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: