University of Canterbury Home
    • Admin
    UC Research Repository
    UC Library
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    View Item 
    1. UC Home
    2. Library
    3. UC Research Repository
    4. College of Education, Health and Human Development
    5. Education, Health and Human Development: Journal Articles
    6. View Item
    1. UC Home
    2.  > 
    3. Library
    4.  > 
    5. UC Research Repository
    6.  > 
    7. College of Education, Health and Human Development
    8.  > 
    9. Education, Health and Human Development: Journal Articles
    10.  > 
    11. View Item

    Influence of artefact correction and recording device type on the practical application of a non-linear heart rate variability biomarker for aerobic threshold determination (2021)

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Influence of Artefact Correction and Recording Device Type on the Practical Application of a Non-Linear Heart Rate Variabili.pdf (2.620Mb)
    Type of Content
    Journal Article
    UC Permalink
    https://hdl.handle.net/10092/101711
    
    Publisher's DOI/URI
    http://doi.org/10.3390/s21030821
    
    Publisher
    MDPI AG
    ISSN
    1424-8220
    Language
    eng
    Collections
    • Education, Health and Human Development: Journal Articles [338]
    Authors
    Rogers B
    Giles D
    Draper N
    Mourot L
    Gronwald T
    show all
    Abstract

    © 2021 by the authors. Recent study points to the value of a non-linear heart rate variability (HRV) biomarker using detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA a1) for aerobic threshold determination (HRVT). Significance of recording artefact, correction methods and device bias on DFA a1 during exercise and HRVT is unclear. Gas exchange and HRV data were obtained from 17 participants during an incremental treadmill run using both ECG and Polar H7 as recording devices. First, artefacts were randomly placed in the ECG time series to equal 1, 3 and 6% missed beats with correction by Kubios software’s automatic and medium threshold method. Based on linear regression, Bland Altman analysis and Wilcoxon paired testing, there was bias present with increasing artefact quantity. Regardless of artefact correction method, 1 to 3% missed beat artefact introduced small but discernible bias in raw DFA a1 measurements. At 6% artefact using medium correction, proportional bias was found (maximum 19%). Despite this bias, the mean HRVT determination was within 1 bpm across all artefact levels and correction modalities. Second, the HRVT ascertained from synchronous ECG vs. Polar H7 recordings did show an average bias of minus 4 bpm. Polar H7 results suggest that device related bias is possible but in the reverse direction as artefact related bias.

    Citation
    Rogers B, Giles D, Draper N, Mourot L, Gronwald T (2021). Influence of artefact correction and recording device type on the practical application of a non-linear heart rate variability biomarker for aerobic threshold determination. Sensors (Switzerland). 21(3). 1-16.
    This citation is automatically generated and may be unreliable. Use as a guide only.
    Keywords
    aerobic threshold; artefact; detrended fluctuation analysis; endurance exercise; heart rate monitors; heart rate variability; intensity distribution; ventilatory threshold; wearables
    ANZSRC Fields of Research
    11 - Medical and Health Sciences::1106 - Human Movement and Sports Science::110602 - Exercise Physiology
    Rights
    Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
    http://hdl.handle.net/10092/17651
    Advanced Search

    Browse

    All of the RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThesis DisciplineThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThesis Discipline

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics
    • SUBMISSIONS
    • Research Outputs
    • UC Theses
    • CONTACTS
    • Send Feedback
    • +64 3 369 3853
    • ucresearchrepository@canterbury.ac.nz
    • ABOUT
    • UC Research Repository Guide
    • Copyright and Disclaimer
    • SUBMISSIONS
    • Research Outputs
    • UC Theses
    • CONTACTS
    • Send Feedback
    • +64 3 369 3853
    • ucresearchrepository@canterbury.ac.nz
    • ABOUT
    • UC Research Repository Guide
    • Copyright and Disclaimer