Hiago M Melo1,2,3, Thiago C Martins1, Lucas M Nascimento1, Alexandre A Hoeller3,4, Roger Walz2,3,4, Emílio Takase1. 1. Laboratório de Educação Cerebral (LEC), Departamento de Psicologia, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil. 2. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Neurociências, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil. 3. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Médicas, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil. 4. Centro de Neurociências Aplicadas (CeNAp), Departamento de Clínica Médica, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have reported that Heart Rate Variability (HRV) indices remain reliable even during recordings shorter than 5 min, suggesting the ultra-short recording method as a valuable tool for autonomic assessment. However, the minimum time-epoch to obtain a reliable record for all HRV domains (time, frequency, and Poincare geometric measures), as well as the effect of respiratory rate on the reliability of these indices remains unknown. METHODS: Twenty volunteers had their HRV recorded in a seated position during spontaneous and controlled respiratory rhythms. HRV intervals with 1, 2, and 3 min were correlated with the gold standard period (6-min duration) and the mean values of all indices were compared in the two respiratory rhythm conditions. RESULTS: rMSSD and SD1 were more reliable for recordings with ultra-short duration at all time intervals (r values from 0.764 to 0.950, p < 0.05) for spontaneous breathing condition, whereas the other indices require longer recording time to obtain reliable values. The controlled breathing rhythm evokes stronger r values for time domain indices (r values from 0.83 to 0.99, p < 0.05 for rMSSD), but impairs the mean values replicability of domains across most time intervals. Although the use of standardized breathing increases the correlations coefficients, all HRV indices showed an increase in mean values (t values from 3.79 to 14.94, p < 0.001) except the RR and HF that presented a decrease (t = 4.14 and 5.96, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that proper ultra-short-term recording method can provide a quick and reliable source of cardiac autonomic nervous system assessment.
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have reported that Heart Rate Variability (HRV) indices remain reliable even during recordings shorter than 5 min, suggesting the ultra-short recording method as a valuable tool for autonomic assessment. However, the minimum time-epoch to obtain a reliable record for all HRV domains (time, frequency, and Poincare geometric measures), as well as the effect of respiratory rate on the reliability of these indices remains unknown. METHODS: Twenty volunteers had their HRV recorded in a seated position during spontaneous and controlled respiratory rhythms. HRV intervals with 1, 2, and 3 min were correlated with the gold standard period (6-min duration) and the mean values of all indices were compared in the two respiratory rhythm conditions. RESULTS: rMSSD and SD1 were more reliable for recordings with ultra-short duration at all time intervals (r values from 0.764 to 0.950, p < 0.05) for spontaneous breathing condition, whereas the other indices require longer recording time to obtain reliable values. The controlled breathing rhythm evokes stronger r values for time domain indices (r values from 0.83 to 0.99, p < 0.05 for rMSSD), but impairs the mean values replicability of domains across most time intervals. Although the use of standardized breathing increases the correlations coefficients, all HRV indices showed an increase in mean values (t values from 3.79 to 14.94, p < 0.001) except the RR and HF that presented a decrease (t = 4.14 and 5.96, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that proper ultra-short-term recording method can provide a quick and reliable source of cardiac autonomic nervous system assessment.
Authors: Mika P Tarvainen; Juha-Pekka Niskanen; Jukka A Lipponen; Perttu O Ranta-Aho; Pasi A Karjalainen Journal: Comput Methods Programs Biomed Date: 2013-08-06 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Lucas A Pereira; Andrew A Flatt; Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo; Irineu Loturco; Fabio Y Nakamura Journal: Int J Sports Physiol Perform Date: 2015-06-24 Impact factor: 4.010
Authors: Anthony B Ciccone; Jacob A Siedlik; Jill M Wecht; Jake A Deckert; Nhuquynh D Nguyen; Joseph P Weir Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2017-04-08 Impact factor: 3.217
Authors: Bruna S Tavares; Giovanna de Paula Vidigal; David M Garner; Rodrigo D Raimundo; Luiz Carlos de Abreu; Vitor E Valenti Journal: Clin Physiol Funct Imaging Date: 2016-03-14 Impact factor: 2.273
Authors: M Loretto Munoz; Arie van Roon; Harriëtte Riese; Chris Thio; Emma Oostenbroek; Iris Westrik; Eco J C de Geus; Ron Gansevoort; Joop Lefrandt; Ilja M Nolte; Harold Snieder Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-09-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Wojciech Zareba; Sally W Thurston; Grazyna Zareba; Jean Philippe Couderc; Katie Evans; Jean Xia; Gene E Watson; J J Strain; Emeir McSorley; Alison Yeates; Maria Mulhern; Conrad F Shamlaye; Pascal Bovet; Edwin van Wijngaarden; Philip W Davidson; Gary J Myers Journal: Neurotoxicol Teratol Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 3.763
Authors: Chin-Hwai Hung; Filipe Manuel Clemente; Pedro Bezerra; Yi-Wen Chiu; Chia-Hua Chien; Zachary Crowley-McHattan; Yung-Sheng Chen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-06-07 Impact factor: 3.390