| Literature DB >> 34187497 |
Beatrice Thielmann1, Robert Pohl2, Irina Böckelmann2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The workloads of emergency physicians are severe. The prevalence of burnout among emergency physicians is higher than with other physicians or compared to the general population. The analysis of heart rate variability (HRV) is a valid method for objective monitoring of workload. The aim of this paper is to systematically evaluate the literature on heart rate variability as an objective indicator for mental stress of emergency physicians.Entities:
Keywords: Alert; Emergency physician; Heart rate variability; Mental stress; Rescue; Workload
Year: 2021 PMID: 34187497 PMCID: PMC8240085 DOI: 10.1186/s12995-021-00313-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Occup Med Toxicol ISSN: 1745-6673 Impact factor: 2.646
Fig. 1Different domains of Heart Rate Variability
Fig. 2Procedure in the context of the systematic literature search
Standard for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies guidelines for heart rate variability research (STARDHRV) by (Bossuyt et al. 2003 [36]; Cohen et al. 2016 [37]; Quintana et al. 2016 [38]; Dobbs et al. 2019 [39]; Laborde et al. 2017 [26])
| Evaluation point | |
|---|---|
| 1 | Identification as a study of validation |
| 2 | Structured summary of study objective, design, methods, results and conclusions |
| 3 | Scientific and practical background, including the intended use of the index device/software |
| 4 | Study objectives and hypotheses described |
| 5 | Study uses within-subject design |
| 6 | Intended sample size and how it was determined (e.g. G*Power 3) |
| 7 | Eligibility criteria including specific restrictions (medical use, gender, age, activity level or BMI) |
| 8 | Pre-testing guidelines reported (e.g., limitations to caffeine, alcohol, physical activity etc.) |
| 9 | Setup of reference standard and index device described in sufficient detail to allow replication (e.g. hardware/software such as brand, electrode configuration, etc.) |
| 10 | Description of environmental conditions (e.g. temperature, humidity, lights on or off, time of day) and posture |
| 11 | A stabilization period prior to sampling was described |
| 12 | The raw sampling rate and length of collection are described |
| 13 | Acknowledgment of breathing (e.g. controlled or not controlled) |
| 14 | Description of how estimates or comparison measures were calculated (e.g. ES, LOA, Pearson’s r or ICC) |
| 15 | Reasons for missing data, along with percentage missing (e.g., equipment, persistent ectopy) and how it was handled |
| 16 | Interbeat artifact identification method (e.g. algorithm, manual inspection) |
| 17 | Artifact cleaning methods and percentage of beats corrected |
| 18 | Description of metrics used and software/script for HRV calculation (log transformation etc.) |
| 19 | Specification of frequency bands used and how they were calculated (e.g. Fast Fourier Transform or Autoregressive modelling) |
| 20 | Baseline demographics of participants |
| 21 | Mean ± SD along with at least one estimate of precision (e.g. LOA, Pearson’s r or ICC) |
| 22 | Study limitations (e.g., sources of potential bias, confounding variables, statistical uncertainty and generalisability) |
| 23 | Implications for practice, including the intended use |
| 24 | Where the full study protocol can be accessed if not fully described |
| 25 | Sources of funding and other support; role of funders |
Outcome and measurement of HRV, characteristics of subjects and results of STARD HRV
| Author, year | method | Outcome and measurement of HRV | Characteristics and risk factors of subjects | STARD HRV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| using HRV between alert intervention | ||||
| Petrowski et al., 2019 [ | ECG at shift, chest belt, Within | Age 44.95 ± 4.8 years, | 16.5 | |
| Schneider et al., 2017 [ | 24-h ECG, chest belt, Within | Age mean 38.4 years, | 15 | |
| Using HRV in other question areas | ||||
| Dutheil et al., 2012 [ | 24-h-ECG, within | 24 h: RMSSD↓*, LogLF/HF↑*. 14 h: RMSSD↓, LogLF/HF↑*. | Age 39.1 ± 6.9 years, | 8.5 |
| Kotov et al., 2012 [ | ECG at work, between | Comparison Burnout syndrome (BS): no signs 0 and alarm stage I in groups of task-oriented or emotion-oriented behavorial coping strategy. | 6.5 | |
within = within-subject-design, between = between-subject-design. BMI body mass index. Significant p-values are marked with asterisks (* for p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.001)
HRV parameter: Time domain, SDNN standard deviation of all normal-to-normal R-R intervals, RMSSD root mean square of successive differences of R-R intervals, NN50 the number of pairs of successive normal-to-normal R-R intervals that differ by more than 50 ms, pNN50 percentage of successive NN intervals that differ by more than 50 ms. Frequency domain: VLF Very low frequency power, 0.003–0.04 hz, LFpow low frequency power, 0.04–0.15 hz, LFnu low frequency normalized units, HF pow high frequency power, 0.15–0.4 Hz, HFnu high frequency normalized units, LF/HF-ratio. Non-linear domain: SD1 and SD2 standard deviations of the Poincare plot, PeEn permutation entropy, ApEn approximate entropy, SampEn sample entropy, ShanEn Shannon entropy of diagonal line lengths’ probability distribution, D2 correlation dimension. Others: SI strain index, CI centrilization index