| Literature DB >> 31882585 |
Piyush Sharma1, Syed Anas Imtiaz2,3, Esther Rodriguez-Villegas2,3.
Abstract
This paper introduces the concept of using acoustic sensing over the radial artery to extract cardiac parameters for continuous vital sign monitoring. It proposes a novel measurement principle that allows detection of the heart sounds together with the pulse wave, an attribute not possible with existing photoplethysmography (PPG)-based methods for monitoring at the wrist. The validity of the proposed principle is demonstrated using a new miniature, battery-operated wearable device to sense the acoustic signals and a novel algorithm to extract the heart rate from these signals. The algorithm utilizes the power spectral analysis of the acoustic pulse signal to detect the S1 sounds and additionally, the K-means method to remove motion artifacts for an accurate heartbeat detection. It has been validated on a dataset consisting of 12 subjects with a data length of 6 hours. The results demonstrate an accuracy of 98.78%, mean absolute error of 0.28 bpm, limits of agreement between -1.68 and 1.69 bpm, and a correlation coefficient of 0.998 with reference to a state-of-the-art PPG-based commercial device. The results in this proof of concept study demonstrate the potential of this new sensing modality to be used as an alternative, or to complement existing methods, for continuous monitoring of heart rate at the wrist.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31882585 PMCID: PMC6934570 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-55599-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Characterization of the acoustic pulse signal: (I) Pulse waveform recorded by placing the miniaturized device designed for this study on the middle position of the radial artery at wrist. (II) Comparison of acoustic and PPG pulse waveforms to synchronize both the signals by matching the nearest systolic peaks. PPG data was recorded using SOMNOscreen pulse oximeter[23]. (III) Joint time-frequency analysis of the acoustic signal obtained using STFT. The color intensity of the grids demonstrates their relative power. (IV) Frequency response (FFT) of the acoustic signal; (b) Proximal, middle and distal positions on the radial artery; (c) PSDs of the acoustic signal obtained with the microphone placed on distal, middle and proximal site. For illustration, the PSD of the noise was obtained from the signal recorded by completely blocking the microphone port.
Figure 2(a) Results obtained for one of the subjects: (I) HR comparison between the estimated output (HR-APS) and reference output (HR-PPG) with upper and lower HR bounds of ±5% respectively. (II) Bland-Altman analysis with more than 95% of HR differences lying within LOAs, defined by . (III) Line of best fit between the estimated and ground truth HR values. The R2 and RMSE value, a measure of fitness of line to the data, were 0.992 and 0.397 respectively. The Pearson correlation was 0.996; (b) Results obtained for the complete dataset: (I) Bland-Altman analysis of the HR comparisons for all the subjects. (II) Line of best fit between the estimated and ground truth HR values for all the subjects. The R2 and RMSE value were 0.997 and 0.861 respectively. The Pearson correlation was 0.998.
Performance metrics of the proposed method obtained by comparing the estimated and ground truth HR.
| P01 | P02 | P03 | P04 | P05 | P06 | P07 | P08 | P09 | P10 | P11 | P12 | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAE (bpm) | 0.10 | 0.34 | 0.19 | 0.24 | 0.36 | 0.14 | 0.18 | 0.15 | 0.40 | 0.34 | 0.38 | 0.61 | 0.28 |
| MAEP (%) | 0.17 | 0.44 | 0.42 | 0.31 | 0.44 | 0.13 | 0.24 | 0.26 | 0.62 | 0.36 | 0.53 | 1.03 | 0.39 |
| −0.01 | −0.18 | 0.03 | 0.03 | −0.01 | 0.01 | −0.01 | −0.02 | 0.01 | 0.09 | 0.07 | −0.06 | 0.01 | |
| 0.39 | 1.19 | 0.47 | 0.66 | 0.84 | 0.38 | 0.49 | 0.85 | 0.96 | 0.90 | 1.17 | 1.49 | 0.86 | |
| LOA (bpm) | [−0.78, 0.77] | [−2.48, 2.12] | [−0.88, 0.94] | [−1.26, 1.32] | [−1.65, 1.64] | [−0.73, 0.75] | [−0.98, 0.96] | [−1.68, 1.63] | [−1.87, 1.90] | [−1.67, 1.85] | [−2.23, 2.38] | [−2.97, 2.86] | [−1.68, 1.69] |
| PC | 0.996 | 0.948 | 0.991 | 0.956 | 0.991 | 0.997 | 0.994 | 0.953 | 0.979 | 0.983 | 0.980 | 0.971 | 0.998 |
| Acc (%) | 99.91 | 96.92 | 99.74 | 99.01 | 98.75 | 99.87 | 97.29 | 98.41 | 97.73 | 99.19 | 98.14 | 94.05 | 98.78 |
Figure 3Variation of HR in individual subjects. HR-STD: standard deviation of the range; HR-MIN: minimum value of the range; HR-MEAN: mean value of the range; HR-MAX: maximum value of the range; HR-RMS: root-mean-square value of the range.
Performance metrics of the proposed method for acoustic signals recorded in a noisy environment.
| P01 | P02 | P03 | P04 | P05 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAE (bpm) | 0.26 | 0.20 | 0.36 | 0.63 | 0.09 |
| MAEP (%) | 0.41 | 0.28 | 0.47 | 0.89 | 0.14 |
| −0.08 | −0.07 | −0.11 | 0.06 | 0.03 | |
| 0.69 | 0.48 | 0.89 | 1.99 | 0.35 | |
| LOA (bpm) | [−1.45, 1.28] | [−1.02, 0.88] | [−1.87, 1.64] | [−3.83, 3.96] | [−0.65, 0.72] |
| PC | 0.970 | 0.988 | 0.936 | 0.861 | 0.986 |
| Acc (%) | 99.29 | 98.12 | 98.81 | 95.00 | 99.05 |
Performance comparison of the proposed method with results obtained from different PPG-based wrist devices used in the commercial market.
| Literature | Wearable Device | Subjects | Data+ Length | ME (bpm) | SD (bpm) | MAE (bpm) | MAEP (%) | PC | SE (bpm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stahl | Scosche Rhythm | 50 | 5.0 hr | — | 1.64* | — | 2.22 | — | 1.60 |
| Mio Alpha | — | 1.52* | — | 2.72 | — | 1.50 | |||
| Fitbit Charge HR | — | 1.45* | — | 7.73 | — | 1.40 | |||
| Basis Peak | — | 1.58* | — | 3.15 | — | 1.50 | |||
| Microsoft Band | — | 1.52* | — | 3.81 | — | 1.40 | |||
| TomTom Runner Cardio | — | 2.06* | — | 2.54 | — | 2.00 | |||
| Parak | Mio Alpha | 21 | 4.2 hr | −0.20 | — | 3.92 | 5.37 | — | — |
| Scosche Rhythm | 0.07 | — | 4.83 | 5.96 | — | — | |||
| Jo | Basis Peak | 24 | 6.0 hr | −0.20 | — | — | — | 0.96 | 6.04 |
| Fitbit Charge HR | −3.73 | — | — | — | 0.83 | 10.66 | |||
| Cadmus | Basis Peak | 40 | 6.7 hr | 2.75 | 9.93 | — | — | — | — |
| Fitbit Charge | −0.65 | 4.92 | — | — | — | — | |||
| Fitbit Surge | −0.30 | 2.40 | — | — | — | — | |||
| Mio Fuse | 1.05 | 4.42 | — | — | — | — | |||
| Spierer | Omron HR500U | 47 | 4.7 hr | 2.22† | — | — | — | — | 3.67† |
| Mio Alpha | 2.39† | — | — | — | — | 6.28† | |||
| This Work | Proposed Acoustic Device | 12 | 6.0 hr | 0.01 | 0.86 | 0.28 | 0.39 | 0.99 | 4.55 |
The table only compares the results of the data collected at the rest position and provides an illustrative comparison because the experimental conditions varied between different works. +The data length is for all the subjects combined together. *SD was calculated from the results of 95% equivalence testing given in this paper. †The results provided in the paper were obtained by averaging the data to 5 seconds epochs.
Figure 4Wearable device used to acquire acoustic signals. The device consists of a MEMS microphone sensor integrated with Bluetooth low energy transmission, and powered by a 3.7 V coin cell battery (20 mm in diameter).
Figure 5Block diagram of the proposed algorithm to determine HR from the acoustic signal by extracting S1 sounds using the STFT analysis.
Pseudo-code algorithm for estimating HR from acoustic pulse signal. The symbol notations are referenced in the main text.
| 1. Initial pre-processing of the signal. | 2. S1 sound extraction from acoustic pulse signal. |
| • Acoustic pulse signal: | • Joint time-frequency analysis: |
| • Low-pass filtering: | • Maximum power, |
| • Downsampling operation: ↓ | • Extract grids with |
| • K-means method: Form two clusters by scoring the signal parts yn using | • Identify S1 regions: ( |
| 3. Peak detection from extracted S1 sounds. | 4. Find the continuous average HR. |
| • Squared energy: | • Find the time indexes for maximum of energy peaks: |
| • Averaging filter: | • Estimate the HR: |
| • Artifact elimination using thresholds: |
Figure 6(a) Pre-processing of the acoustic signal sensed by the system: (I) Original signal. (II) Low-pass filtered and downsampled signal to remove higher frequency components and redundant information respectively. (III) Clustering using the K-means method to identify signal segments corrupted with motion artifacts. Symbol + and □ represents the features and cluster centroids respectively. (IV) Signal segment corrupted with motion artifact (due to wrist/finger movement) removed from the downsampled signal; (b) S1 sounds extraction from a different pre-processed signal with no corrupted segment: (I) Acoustic signal after initial low-pass filtering, downsampling and K-means application. (II) PSD of the signal obtained using STFT to extract S1 sounds. (III) Rectangular windows representing the regions of interest. (IV) S1 sounds extracted by adding a tolerance of 150 milliseconds on both sides of the rectangular windows.
Figure 7(a) Peak detection in a clean signal: (I) Squared energy of the S1 sound waveform in Fig. 6b(IV). (II) Energy peaks obtained using the moving average filter. Represent the time indexes corresponding to the S1 sounds; (b) Peak detection in a corrupted signal: (I) Input acoustic signal corrupted with motion artifacts (introduced by wrist/finger movements). (II) Squared energy of the signal obtained after PSD analysis. The redundant peaks due to the motion artifacts in systolic and diastolic phases of the cardiac cycle can be observed. (III) Energy envelope obtained using the moving average filter. (IV) Thresholding of energy peaks to remove envelopes corresponding to the motion artifacts. (V) Time indexes of energy peaks corresponding to S1 sound waveforms in the signal. This shows how the algorithm successfully distinguishes between motion artifacts and S1 waveforms.