Heart Rate Variability Analysis: How Much Artifact Can We Remove?

David C Sheridan, Ryan Dehart, Amber Lin, Michael Sabbaj, Steven D Baker, David C Sheridan, Ryan Dehart, Amber Lin, Michael Sabbaj, Steven D Baker

Abstract

Objective: Heart rate variability (HRV) evaluates small beat-to-beat time interval (BBI) differences produced by the heart and suggested as a marker of the autonomic nervous system. Artifact produced by movement with wrist worn devices can significantly impact the validity of HRV analysis. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of small errors in BBI selection on HRV analysis and produce a foundation for future research in mental health wearable technology.

Methods: This was a sub-analysis from a prospective observational clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03030924). A cohort of 10 subject's HRV tracings from a wearable wrist monitor without any artifact were manipulated by the study team to represent the most common forms of artifact encountered.

Results: Root mean square of successive differences stayed below a clinically significant change when up to 5 beats were selected at the wrong time interval and up to 36% of BBIs was removed. Standard deviation of next normal intervals stayed below a clinically significant change when up to 3 beats were selected at the wrong time interval and up to 36% of BBIs were removed. High frequency HRV shows significant changes when more than 2 beats were selected at the wrong time interval and any BBIs were removed.

Conclusion: Time domain HRV metrics appear to be more robust to artifact compared to frequency domains. Investigators examining wearable technology for mental health should be aware of these values for future analysis of HRV studies to improve data quality.

Keywords: Artifact; Heart rate variability; Mental health; Suicidality.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Mean Square of Successive Differences (RMSSD). A: For shift, mean absolute percent difference stays below 5% until about 5 samples for a random shift and about 5 samples for a shift to the right. B: For percent of beats removed, mean absolute percent difference is always below 5% (up to 36 % of beats removed). It's about the same for removal randomly versus consecutively.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Standard Deviation of NN intervals (SDNN). A: For shift, mean absolute percent difference stays below 5% until about 3 samples and then dramatically increases. It's about the same for random shift versus right shift. B: For percent of beats removed, mean absolute percent difference is always below 5% (up to 36% of beats removed). It's about the same for removal randomly versus consecutively.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Mean number of times in which the difference in NN intervals is greater than 50 milliseconds (pNN50). A: PNN50 is very sensitive to shifting. No amount of shifting keeps the average absolute percent difference less than 5%. B: For beats removed, mean absolute percent difference is below 5% until about 4% of beats for randomly or consecutively removed beats.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Low Frequency (LF). A: For shift, mean absolute percent difference stays below 5% until about 2 samples, hovers around 5% until about 6 beats, and then dramatically increases. For a right shift, no amount of shift makes the mean absolute percent difference rise above 5%. LF if very robust to shifting samples right. B: For beats removed, LF is very sensitive with the mean absolute percent difference staying below 5% for only 2% of beats removed. It’s the same regardless of random versus consecutive removal.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
High Frequency (HF). A: For shift, mean absolute percent difference stays below 5% until about 2 samples for a random shift. For a right shift, it mean absolute percent difference remains below 5% until about 8 samples shifted. B: For beats removed randomly, HF is very sensitive with the mean absolute percent difference always being greater than 5% with any amount of beats removed. For beats removed consecutively, that hovers around 5% mean absolute difference until 8% of beats removed.

References

    1. Schiweck C, Piette D, Berckmans D, Claes S, Vrieze E. Heart rate and high frequency heart rate variability during stress as biomarker for clinical depression. A systematic review. Psychol Med. 2019;49:200–211.
    1. Wu L, Jiang Z, Li C, Shu M. Prediction of heart rate variability on cardiac sudden death in heart failure patients: a systematic review. Int J Cardiol. 2014;174:857–860.
    1. Goldenberg I, Goldkorn R, Shlomo N, Einhorn M, Levitan J, Kuperstein R, et al. Heart Rate Variability for Risk Assessment of Myocardial Ischemia in Patients Without Known Coronary Artery Disease: The HRV-DETECT (Heart Rate Variability for the Detection of Myocardial Ischemia) Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8:e014540.
    1. Heart Rate Variability Standards of measurement, physiological interpretation, and clinical use. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology. Eur Heart J. 1996;17:354–381.
    1. Singh N, Moneghetti KJ, Christle JW, Hadley D, Plews D, Froelicher V. Heart rate variability: an old metric with new meaning in the era of using mhealth technologies for health and exercise training guidance. Part one: physiology and methods. Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2018;7:193–198.
    1. Shaffer F, Ginsberg JP. An overview of heart rate variability metrics and norms. Front Public Health. 2017;5:258.
    1. Sun Y, Thakor N. Photoplethysmography revisited: from contact to noncontact, from point to imaging. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016;63:463–477.
    1. Castaneda D, Esparza A, Ghamari M, Soltanpur C, Nazeran H. A review on wearable photoplethysmography sensors and their potential future applications in health care. Int J Biosens Bioelectron. 2018;4:195–202.
    1. Group N. Market Leaders Dominate Sales, with the Top Three Brands Representing 88 Percent of Unit Share. In. Smartwatch Total Market Report. Port Washington: NPD Group; 2019.
    1. Zhang Y, Song S, Vullings R, Biswas D, Simões-Capela N, van Helleputte N, et al. Motion artifact reduction for wrist-worn photoplethysmograph sensors based on different wavelengths. Sensors (Basel) 2019;19:673.
    1. Scholkmann F, Boss J, Wolf M. An efficient algorithm for automatic peak detection in noisy periodic and quasi-periodic signals. Algorithms. 2012;5:588–603.
    1. Baek HJ, Shin J. Effect of missing inter-beat interval data on heart rate variability analysis using wrist-worn wearables. J Med Syst. 2017;41:147.
    1. Jeyhani V, Mahdiani S, Peltokangas M, Vehkaoja A. Comparison of HRV parameters derived from photoplethysmography and electrocardiography signals. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015;2015:5952–5955.
    1. Vescio B, Salsone M, Gambardella A, Quattrone A. Comparison between Electrocardiographic and Earlobe Pulse Photoplethysmographic Detection for Evaluating Heart Rate Variability in Healthy Subjects in Short- and Long-Term Recordings. Sensors (Basel) 2018;18(3)
    1. Schafer A, Vagedes J. How accurate is pulse rate variability as an estimate of heart rate variability? A review on studies comparing photoplethysmographic technology with an electrocardiogram. Int J Cardiol. 2013;166:15–29.
    1. Wang B, Chai X, Zhang Z, Wang W. [The Study of the Measurement of Heart Rate Variability Using ECG and Photoplethysmographic Signal] Zhongguo Yi Liao Qi Xie Za Zhi. 2015;39:249–252, 264.
    1. Georgiou K, Larentzakis AV, Khamis NN, Alsuhaibani GI, Alaska YA, Giallafos EJ. Can wearable devices accurately measure heart rate variability? A systematic review. Folia Med (Plovdiv) 2018;60:7–20.
    1. Reali P, Tacchino G, Rocco G, Cerutti S, Bianchi AM. Heart rate variability from wearables: a comparative analysis among standard ECG, a smart shirt and a wristband. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019;261:128–133.
    1. Goessl VC, Curtiss JE, Hofmann SG. The effect of heart rate variability biofeedback training on stress and anxiety: a meta-analysis. Psychol Med. 2017;47:2578–2586.
    1. Hernando D, Roca S, Sancho J, Alesanco A, Bailon R. Validation of the apple watch for heart rate variability measurements during relax and mental stress in healthy subjects. Sensors (Basel) 2018;18:2619.

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa