OBJECTIVE: Systolic time intervals, such as the pre-ejection period (PEP), are important parameters for assessing cardiac contractility that can be measured non-invasively using seismocardiography (SCG). Recent studies have shown that specific points on accelerometer- and gyroscope-based SCG signals can be used for PEP estimation. However, the complex morphology and inter-subject variation of the SCG signal can make this assumption very challenging and increase the root mean squared error (RMSE) when these techniques are used to develop a global model. METHODS: In this study, we compared gyroscope- and accelerometer-based SCG signals, individually and in combination, for estimating PEP to show the efficacy of these sensors in capturing valuable information regarding cardiovascular health. We extracted general time-domain features from all the axes of these sensors and developed global models using various regression techniques. RESULTS: In single-axis comparison of gyroscope and accelerometer, angular velocity signal around head to foot axis from the gyroscope provided the lowest RMSE of 12.63 ± 0.49 ms across all subjects. The best estimate of PEP, with a RMSE of 11.46 ± 0.32 ms across all subjects, was achieved by combining features from the gyroscope and accelerometer. Our global model showed 30% lower RMSE when compared to algorithms used in recent literature. CONCLUSION: Gyroscopes can provide better PEP estimation compared to accelerometers located on the mid-sternum. Global PEP estimation models can be improved by combining general time domain features from both sensors. SIGNIFICANCE: This work can be used to develop a low-cost wearable heart-monitoring device and to generate a universal estimation model for systolic time intervals using a single- or multiple-sensor fusion.
OBJECTIVE: Systolic time intervals, such as the pre-ejection period (PEP), are important parameters for assessing cardiac contractility that can be measured non-invasively using seismocardiography (SCG). Recent studies have shown that specific points on accelerometer- and gyroscope-based SCG signals can be used for PEP estimation. However, the complex morphology and inter-subject variation of the SCG signal can make this assumption very challenging and increase the root mean squared error (RMSE) when these techniques are used to develop a global model. METHODS: In this study, we compared gyroscope- and accelerometer-based SCG signals, individually and in combination, for estimating PEP to show the efficacy of these sensors in capturing valuable information regarding cardiovascular health. We extracted general time-domain features from all the axes of these sensors and developed global models using various regression techniques. RESULTS: In single-axis comparison of gyroscope and accelerometer, angular velocity signal around head to foot axis from the gyroscope provided the lowest RMSE of 12.63 ± 0.49 ms across all subjects. The best estimate of PEP, with a RMSE of 11.46 ± 0.32 ms across all subjects, was achieved by combining features from the gyroscope and accelerometer. Our global model showed 30% lower RMSE when compared to algorithms used in recent literature. CONCLUSION:Gyroscopes can provide better PEP estimation compared to accelerometers located on the mid-sternum. Global PEP estimation models can be improved by combining general time domain features from both sensors. SIGNIFICANCE: This work can be used to develop a low-cost wearable heart-monitoring device and to generate a universal estimation model for systolic time intervals using a single- or multiple-sensor fusion.
Authors: Omer T Inan; Pierre-Francois Migeotte; Kwang-Suk Park; Mozziyar Etemadi; Kouhyar Tavakolian; Ramon Casanella; John Zanetti; Jens Tank; Irina Funtova; G Kim Prisk; Marco Di Rienzo Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2014-10-07 Impact factor: 5.772
Authors: Abdul Q Javaid; Hazar Ashouri; Alexis Dorier; Mozziyar Etemadi; J Alex Heller; Shuvo Roy; Omer T Inan Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Mojtaba Jafari Tadi; Eero Lehtonen; Antti Saraste; Jarno Tuominen; Juho Koskinen; Mika Teräs; Juhani Airaksinen; Mikko Pänkäälä; Tero Koivisto Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-07-28 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jonathan Zia; Jacob Kimball; Sinan Hersek; Md Mobashir Hasan Shandhi; Beren Semiz; Omer T Inan Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2019-07-26 Impact factor: 5.772
Authors: Venu G Ganti; Andrew M Carek; Brandi N Nevius; J Alex Heller; Mozziyar Etemadi; Omer T Inan Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 7.021
Authors: Beren Semiz; Andrew M Carek; Jessica C Johnson; Shireen Ahmad; J Alex Heller; Florencia G Vicente; Stacey Caron; Charles W Hogue; Mozziyar Etemadi; Omer T Inan Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 5.772
Authors: Md Mobashir Hasan Shandhi; William H Bartlett; James Alex Heller; Mozziyar Etemadi; Aaron Young; Thomas Plotz; Omer T Inan Journal: IEEE J Biomed Health Inform Date: 2021-03-05 Impact factor: 5.772