| Literature DB >> 35069945 |
Bjørn-Jostein Singstad1, Naomi Azulay2,3, Andreas Bjurstedt1, Simen S Bjørndal1, Magnus F Drageseth1, Peter Engeset1, Kari Eriksen1, Muluberhan Y Gidey1, Espen O Granum1, Matias G Greaker1, Amund Grorud1, Sebastian O Hewes1, Jie Hou1, Adrián M Llop Recha1, Christoffer Matre1, Arnoldas Seputis1, Simen E Sørensen1, Vegard Thøgersen1, Vegard Munkeby Joten1, Christian Tronstad4, Ørjan G Martinsen1,4.
Abstract
Due to the possibilities in miniaturization and wearability, photoplethysmography (PPG) has recently gained a large interest not only for heart rate measurement, but also for estimating heart rate variability, which is derived from ECG by convention. The agreement between PPG and ECG-based HRV has been assessed in several studies, but the feasibility of PPG-based HRV estimation is still largely unknown for many conditions. In this study, we assess the feasibility of HRV estimation based on finger PPG during rest, mild physical exercise and mild mental stress. In addition, we compare different variants of signal processing methods including selection of fiducial point and outlier correction. Based on five minutes synchronous recordings of PPG and ECG from 15 healthy participants during each of these three conditions, the PPG-based HRV estimation was assessed for the SDNN and RMSSD parameters, calculated based on two different fiducial points (foot point and maximum slope), with and without outlier correction. The results show that HRV estimation based on finger PPG is feasible during rest and mild mental stress, but can give large errors during mild physical exercise. A good estimation is very dependent on outlier correction and fiducial point selection, and SDNN seems to be a more robust parameter compared to RMSSD for PPG-based HRV estimation.Entities:
Keywords: electrocardiography; heart rate variability; plethysmography
Year: 2021 PMID: 35069945 PMCID: PMC8713388 DOI: 10.2478/joeb-2021-0012
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Electr Bioimpedance ISSN: 1891-5469
Figure 1Placement of Shimmer3 measurement units (white boxes), ECG electrodes (blue circles) and the PPG sensor (green box).
Figure 2A seven beat PPG sequence showing clipping of the systolic peaks (blue curve) and the spline-based interpolation used (orange curve). The two fiducial points assessed is also marked in the figure.
Figure 3Example showing 13 beats of PPG recording together with the detected foot (red crosses) and max slope (black crosses) fiducial points. The foot points were located based on identifying negative-to-positive zero-crossing points of the first derivative of the signal, and the subsequent peak of the derivative was used to locate the max slope fiducial point.
Figure 4Average heart rate for all participants during the different periods.
Figure 5Example segments from recordings with good PPG signal quality (a), during the resting phase, and with poor PPG signal quality (b) during the exercise phase.
Figure 6A transient disturbance in the PPG signal (upper plot) causing a large deviation in the estimated inter-beat interval over two points (blue line in lower plot). The red line shows the IBI time-series after outlier correction. The red and green crosses in the upper plot mark the foot and maximum slope fiducial points, respectively.
Figure 7The spread of SDNN for the 15 participants measured with ECG and PPG with and without outlier correction, broken down by the different phases and fiducial points (foot and maxdiff). Outliers are shown in red.
Figure 8The spread of RMSSD for the 15 participants measured with ECG and PPG with and without outlier correction, broken down by the different phases and fiducial points (foot and maxdiff). Outliers are shown in red.
Summary of agreement between HRV derived from ECG and PPG for each type of activity, depending on PPG fiducial point selection with and without correction of outliers. The agreement is represented as median absolute deviation (MAD), median absolute relative deviation (MARD) and the root mean square error (RMSE).
| Fiducial point | Outlier correction | HRV | Agreement | Relaxation | Exercise | Mental stress |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Foot | Yes | SDNN | MAD | 9,83 | 137,86 | 10,14 |
| Max slope | Yes | SDNN | MAD | 2,25 | 78,82 | 1,19 |
| Foot | No | SDNN | MAD | 28,12 | 290,49 | 26,95 |
| Max slope | No | SDNN | MAD | 21,98 | 272,73 | 17,6 |
| Foot | Yes | RMSSD | MAD | 27,56 | 189,3 | 50,17 |
| Max slope | Yes | RMSSD | MAD | 3,46 | 114,26 | 2,27 |
| Foot | No | RMSSD | MAD | 64,21 | 415,58 | 72,18 |
| Max slope | No | RMSSD | MAD | 41,31 | 369,77 | 27,77 |
| Foot | Yes | SDNN | MARD | 18,00 % | 341 % | 23,20 % |
| Max slope | Yes | SDNN | MARD | 3,60 % | 239 % | 1,80 % |
| Foot | No | SDNN | MARD | 51,50 % | 933 % | 53,90 % |
| Max slope | No | SDNN | MARD | 22,00 % | 877 % | 28,30 % |
| Foot | Yes | RMSSD | MARD | 85,00 % | 1576 % | 156 % |
| Max slope | Yes | RMSSD | MARD | 8,20 % | 647 % | 6,40 % |
| Foot | No | RMSSD | MARD | 152 % | 1727 % | 216 % |
| Max slope | No | RMSSD | MARD | 60,00 % | 1572 % | 79,30 % |
| Foot | Yes | SDNN | RMSE | 21,41 | 202,95 | 27,33 |
| Max slope | Yes | SDNN | RMSE | 14,83 | 184,50 | 8,59 |
| Foot | No | SDNN | RMSE | 85,16 | 403,71 | 60,56 |
| Max slope | No | SDNN | RMSE | 79,17 | 395,91 | 49,43 |
| Foot | Yes | RMSSD | RMSE | 43,17 | 253,67 | 66,01 |
| Max slope | Yes | RMSSD | RMSE | 14,98 | 212,15 | 22,28 |
| Foot | No | RMSSD | RMSE | 143,70 | 552,46 | 126,00 |
| Max slope | No | RMSSD | RMSE | 131,14 | 533,94 | 99,57 |
Figure 9The difference between SDNN values as calculated from PPG and ECG for the 15 participants in the different phases. Grouped by fiducial point and outlier correction. Outliers and median values are shown in red.
Figure 10The difference between RMSSD values as calculated from PPG and ECG for the 15 participants in the different phases. Grouped by fiducial point and outlier correction. Outliers and median values are shown in red.
Summary of agreement between RR derived from ECG and IBI derived from PPG for each type of activity. The agreement is presented as median absolute deviation (MAD), median absolute relative deviation (MARD) and the root mean square error (RMSE).
| Fiducial point | Outlier correction | Agreement | Relaxation | Exercise | Mental stress |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Foot | Yes | MAD | 3.97 | 18.93 | 4.71 |
| Max slope | Yes | MAD | 2.82 | 4.34 | 2.29 |
| Foot | No | MAD | 4.03 | 42.40 | 4.46 |
| Max slope | No | MAD | 2.93 | 48.86 | 2.29 |
| Foot | Yes | MARD | 0.51% | 3.24% | 0.69% |
| Max slope | Yes | MARD | 0.36% | 0.67% | 0.35% |
| Foot | No | MARD | 0.58% | 8.02% | 0.62% |
| Max slope | No | MARD | 0.38% | 9.45% | 0.35% |
| Foot | Yes | RMSE | 13.02 | 106.27 | 12.73 |
| Max slope | Yes | RMSE | 8.41 | 99.51 | 6.98 |
| Foot | No | RMSE | 34.03 | 255.14 | 21.85 |
| Max slope | No | RMSE | 35.15 | 262.89 | 14.22 |