Key result
A higher ratio of time spent in a lying position during 24-hour ambulatory monitoring is associated with a decreased LF/HF ratio of heart rate variability, independent of age.
Why the study?
Is the ratio of time in lying position associated with LF/HF of heart rate variability during ambulatory monitoring?
Observational (n=47,624)
Is the ratio of time in lying position associated with LF/HF of heart rate variability during ambulatory monitoring?
The LF/HF ratio of heart rate variability during ambulatory monitoring is inversely associated with the proportion of time spent in a lying position, suggesting posture should be accounted for when interpreting this metric.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Posture adjustment may be needed in ambulatory HRV interpretation; this observational association leaves open causal effects on autonomic balance.
Low-frequency-to-high-frequency ratio (LF/HF) of heart rate variability has been used as a maker of stress or sympathetic predominance in cardiac autonomic activity. Laboratory studies, however, indicate that LF/HF increases with standing and decreases with lying. We hypothesized that LF/HF in ambulatory monitoring is associated with the ratio of time in lying position during the monitoring (lying ratio). We examined this hypothesis using 47,624 ambulatory 24-h electrocardiograms recorded with 3-axis accelerograms in a large database of Allostatic State Mapping by Ambulatory ECG Repository (ALLSTAR) project. We found that LF/HF decreases with advancing lying ratio even after adjustment for the effects of age.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yoshida et al. (2016) reported an observational. Ratio of time in lying position (lying ratio) was evaluated on Low-frequency-to-high-frequency ratio (LF/HF) of heart rate variability. A higher ratio of time spent in a lying position during 24-hour ambulatory monitoring is associated with a decreased LF/HF ratio of heart rate variability, independent of age.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: