Why the study?
There are limited studies regarding the complexity or nonlinear dynamics of heart rate variability during exposure to traffic noise.
Does exposure to traffic noise alter the complexity of heart rate variability in healthy adult women?
Does exposure to traffic noise alter the complexity of heart rate variability in healthy adult women?
Traffic noise exposure alters heart rate variability complexity in healthy women, which can be best quantified using the CFP3 metric with adaptive Multi-Taper Method adjustments.
Alerts clinicians to potential autonomic effects of traffic noise; leaves open CFP3 utility pending validation studies.
Aim . Previous studies have described the substantial impact of different types of noise on the linear behaviour of heart rate variability (HRV). Yet, there are limited studies about the complexity or nonlinear dynamics of HRV during exposure to traffic noise. Here, we evaluated the complexity of HRV during traffic noise exposure via six power spectra and, when adjusted by the parameters of the Multi-Taper Method (MTM). Material and methods . We analysed 31 healthy female students between 18 and 30 years old. Subjects remained at rest, seated under spontaneous breathing for 20 minutes with an earphone turned off and then the volunteers were exposed to traffic noise through an earphone for a period of 20 minutes. The traffic noise was recorded from a busy urban street and the sound involved car, bus, trucks engineers and horn sounds (71-104 dB). Results . The results stipulate that CFP3 and CFP6 are the best metrics to distinguish the two groups. The most appropriate power spectra were, Welch and MTM. Increasing the DPSS parameter of MTM increased the performance of both CFP3 and CFP6 as mathematical markers. Adaptive was the preferred type for Thomson’s nonlinear combination method. Conclusion . CFP3 with the adaptive option for MTM, and increased DPSS is designated as the best mathematical marker on the basis of five statistical tests.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garner et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: