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

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorRogers B
dc.contributor.authorGiles D
dc.contributor.authorDraper N
dc.contributor.authorMourot L
dc.contributor.authorGronwald T
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-17T22:58:55Z
dc.date.available2021-03-17T22:58:55Z
dc.date.issued2021en
dc.date.updated2021-03-12T08:13:12Z
dc.description.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.en
dc.identifier.citationRogers 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.en
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi.org/10.3390/s21030821
dc.identifier.issn1424-8220
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10092/101711
dc.languageeng
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherMDPI AGen
dc.rightsCopyright: © 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/).en
dc.rights.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10092/17651en
dc.subjectaerobic thresholden
dc.subjectartefacten
dc.subjectdetrended fluctuation analysisen
dc.subjectendurance exerciseen
dc.subjectheart rate monitorsen
dc.subjectheart rate variabilityen
dc.subjectintensity distributionen
dc.subjectventilatory thresholden
dc.subjectwearablesen
dc.subject.anzsrcField of Research::11 - Medical and Health Sciences::1106 - Human Movement and Sports Science::110602 - Exercise Physiologyen
dc.titleInfluence of artefact correction and recording device type on the practical application of a non-linear heart rate variability biomarker for aerobic threshold determinationen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
uc.collegeFaculty of Health
uc.departmentSchool of Health Sciences
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Influence of Artefact Correction and Recording Device Type on the Practical Application of a Non-Linear Heart Rate Variabili.pdf
Size:
2.62 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Collections
Education: Journal Articles
Health: Journal Articles