| Literature DB >> 35844670 |
Zixia Wang1, Shuai Zha1, Baoxian Yu2,3, Pengbin Chen4, Zhiqiang Pang4, Han Zhang2,3.
Abstract
As a physiological phenomenon, sleep takes up approximately 30% of human life and significantly affects people's quality of life. To assess the quality of night sleep, polysomnography (PSG) has been recognized as the gold standard for sleep staging. The drawbacks of such a clinical device, however, are obvious, since PSG limits the patient's mobility during the night, which is inconvenient for in-home monitoring. In this paper, a noncontact vital signs monitoring system using the piezoelectric sensors is deployed. Using the so-designed noncontact sensing system, heartbeat interval (HI), respiratory interval (RI), and body movements (BM) are separated and recorded, from which a new dimension of vital signs, referred to as the coordination of heartbeat interval and respiratory interval (CHR), is obtained. By extracting both the independent features of HI, RI, and BM and the coordinated features of CHR in different timescales, Wake-REM-NREM sleep staging is performed, and a postprocessing of staging fusion algorithm is proposed to refine the accuracy of classification. A total of 17 all-night recordings of noncontact measurement simultaneous with PSG from 10 healthy subjects were examined, and the leave-one-out cross-validation was adopted to assess the performance of Wake-REM-NREM sleep staging. Taking the gold standard of PSG as reference, numerical results show that the proposed sleep staging achieves an averaged accuracy and Cohen's Kappa index of 82.42% and 0.63, respectively, and performs robust to subjects suffering from sleep-disordered breathing.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35844670 PMCID: PMC9287107 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2016598
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 3.822
Figure 1The overall architecture of the noncontact sleep monitoring system.
Figure 2The overview of the vital signs monitoring system. (a) The subject simultaneously monitored by both PSG and the noncontact vital signs system. (b) The device of the vital signs monitoring system.
Information of the datasets.
| Subject ID | Gender | Age | Weight (kg) | Height (m) | Total (night) | Valid (night) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N1 | M | 23 | 65.23 | 1.70 | 5 | 4 |
| N2 | M | 22 | 66.52 | 1.72 | 4 | 3 |
| N3 | F | 21 | 48.36 | 1.60 | 1 | 0 |
| N4 | M | 23 | 70.44 | 1.74 | 4 | 4 |
| N5 | F | 24 | 52.62 | 1.64 | 1 | 0 |
| N6 | M | 23 | 69.87 | 1.73 | 2 | 2 |
| N7 | M | 22 | 62.15 | 1.67 | 3 | 2 |
| N8 | F | 25 | 68.53 | 1.76 | 1 | 0 |
| N9 | M | 22 | 60.76 | 1.66 | 1 | 1 |
| N10 | M | 23 | 67.39 | 1.75 | 2 | 1 |
Figure 3An example of comparison between detected HI and RI in a noncontact manner and that obtained by using the gold standard device.
Independent features of HI((RI().
| Feature index | Feature name | Feature description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 (10) | Mean | Mean value of HI( |
| 2 (11) | CV | Coefficient variation of HI( |
| 3–7 (12–16) | Inter ratio percentiles | Ratio of percentile A and percentile B of HI( |
| 8 (17) | MAD | Median absolute deviation of HI( |
| 9 (18) | ACD | Averaged cumulative difference: the moving average of the absolute difference between the former 30 seconds and the latter 30 seconds of HI( |
Coordinated features of HI( and RI(.
| Feature index | Feature name | Feature description |
|
| ||
| 19 | Ratio of mean | Ratio of mean of HI( |
| 20 | Ratio of CV | Ratio of CV of HI( |
| 21–31 | Intra ratio percentiles | Ratio of percentile A of HI( |
| 32 | Ratio of MAD | Ratio of MAD of HI( |
| 33 | Ratio of ACD | Ratio of ACD of HI( |
Features of BM.
| Feature index | Feature name | Feature description |
|---|---|---|
| 34 | Motion ratio | The proportion of body movement in the current epoch |
| 35 | Motion nums | The number of periods of successive one-value signal in the current epoch |
| 36 | Largest motion ratio | Longest one period in epoch divided by 60 |
| 37 | Average motion ratio | Motion ratiodivided byMotion nums |
| 38–39 | Motion ratio of the previous | The proportion of body movement of epoch located, respectively, |
| 40–41 | Motion ratio of the next | The proportion of body movement of epoch located, respectively, |
Figure 4Feature importance of HI, RI, BM, and CHR.
Figure 5Accuracy and Kappa in different timescales.
Figure 6The classification performance with and without the proposed sleep stage fusion.
Figure 7(a) Reference sleep stages provided by PSG. (b) Classified sleep stages estimated without stage fusion. (c) Classified sleep stages estimated with stage fusion.
Figure 8Confusion matrix of Wake-REM-NREM sleep stage classification.
Information of the subjects with sleep-disordered breathing.
| Subject ID | Gender | Age | AHI (times/hour) | Severity | Total (night) | Valid (night) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | M | 49 | 10.6 | Mild | 1 | 1 |
| A2 | F | 70 | 6.3 | Mild | 2 | 1 |
| A3 | M | 70 | 7.7 | Mild | 1 | 1 |
| A4 | F | 69 | 8.1 | Mild | 1 | 1 |
| A5 | M | 73 | 5.9 | Mild | 2 | 1 |
| A6 | M | 50 | 6.7 | Mild | 1 | 1 |
| A7 | M | 51 | 7.5 | Mild | 1 | 1 |
Performance of the sleep-disordered breathing subjects.
| Subject ID | Accuracy (%) | Kappa |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 76.07 | 0.58 |
| 2 | 75.30 | 0.48 |
| 3 | 65.11 | 0.39 |
| 4 | 78.49 | 0.63 |
| 5 | 68.11 | 0.41 |
| 6 | 79.81 | 0.67 |
| 7 | 82.62 | 0.62 |
| Average | 75.07 | 0.54 |
| Std | 5.85 | 0.11 |
Figure 9(a) Reference sleep stages provided by PSG. (b) Classified sleep stages estimated without stage fusion. (c) Classified sleep stages estimated with stage fusion.