Validity of a Heart Rate Monitor for Heart Rate Variability Analysis During an Orthostatic Challenge.

Q1 Health Professions
International journal of exercise science Pub Date : 2024-06-01 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01
Christian Soto-Catalan, Alain-S Comtois, David Martin, Suzanne Leclerc
{"title":"Validity of a Heart Rate Monitor for Heart Rate Variability Analysis During an Orthostatic Challenge.","authors":"Christian Soto-Catalan, Alain-S Comtois, David Martin, Suzanne Leclerc","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Heart rate variability (HRV) is used as a measure of autonomic nervous system (ANS) function and is based on heart rate (HR) beat-to-beat time interval variance analysis. Various techniques are used for recording HR, however, few studies have compared Holter-type recordings vs HR monitors (HRM) during an orthostatic challenge.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Compare HRV measures from an electrocardiogram (ECG) Holter and a HRM as a tool for investigating ANS response for post-concussion rehabilitation follow-up.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-seven participants (<i>n</i> = 27; 15 females, 12 males), 18 to 35 years old, non-smoking, no history of cardiac illness and physically active (3 times per week, 60 mins, moderate intensity exercise) participated in the study. ECG signals and HRM were recorded beat-to-beat (R-R) simultaneously. A motorized tilt table was set at 0 degree for supine and 85 degrees for standing position. Participants were instructed to remain for 7 minutes in each position. R-R signals from both Holter and Polar HRM recording starting points were matched before further analysis. Bland-Altman plots were used to compare recordings from the Holter (gold standard) and the Polar HRM in both positions. Unpaired <i>t</i>-test was used to compare measurements obtained with both systems. Significance was set at <i>p</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were observed between R-R measurements taken with both systems under equal conditions (supine and standing). Same variables under similar conditions were significantly correlated (<i>p</i> = 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both recording and analysis systems (Holter vs HRM) yielded comparable results. Thus, both systems appear valid and interchangeable for HRV analysis for measuring orthostatic challenge HRV responses.</p>","PeriodicalId":14171,"journal":{"name":"International journal of exercise science","volume":"17 2","pages":"810-818"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11379062/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of exercise science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Heart rate variability (HRV) is used as a measure of autonomic nervous system (ANS) function and is based on heart rate (HR) beat-to-beat time interval variance analysis. Various techniques are used for recording HR, however, few studies have compared Holter-type recordings vs HR monitors (HRM) during an orthostatic challenge.

Objectives: Compare HRV measures from an electrocardiogram (ECG) Holter and a HRM as a tool for investigating ANS response for post-concussion rehabilitation follow-up.

Methods: Twenty-seven participants (n = 27; 15 females, 12 males), 18 to 35 years old, non-smoking, no history of cardiac illness and physically active (3 times per week, 60 mins, moderate intensity exercise) participated in the study. ECG signals and HRM were recorded beat-to-beat (R-R) simultaneously. A motorized tilt table was set at 0 degree for supine and 85 degrees for standing position. Participants were instructed to remain for 7 minutes in each position. R-R signals from both Holter and Polar HRM recording starting points were matched before further analysis. Bland-Altman plots were used to compare recordings from the Holter (gold standard) and the Polar HRM in both positions. Unpaired t-test was used to compare measurements obtained with both systems. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results: No significant differences were observed between R-R measurements taken with both systems under equal conditions (supine and standing). Same variables under similar conditions were significantly correlated (p = 0.0001).

Conclusion: Both recording and analysis systems (Holter vs HRM) yielded comparable results. Thus, both systems appear valid and interchangeable for HRV analysis for measuring orthostatic challenge HRV responses.

心率监测仪在正张力挑战中进行心率变异性分析的有效性。
心率变异性(HRV)可用于测量自律神经系统(ANS)的功能,其基础是心率(HR)节拍间时间间隔方差分析。记录心率的技术多种多样,但很少有研究对正压挑战期间的 Holter 型记录与心率监测仪(HRM)进行比较:目的:比较心电图 Holter 和心率监测仪的心率变异测量结果,作为脑震荡后康复跟踪调查自律神经系统反应的工具:27 名参与者(n = 27;15 名女性,12 名男性)参加了这项研究,他们的年龄在 18 至 35 岁之间,不吸烟,无心脏病史,喜欢运动(每周 3 次,每次 60 分钟,中等强度运动)。同时记录心电信号和心率表的逐次搏动(R-R)。电动倾斜台设置为仰卧位 0 度,站立位 85 度。参与者被要求在每个姿势下保持 7 分钟。在进一步分析之前,Holter 和 Polar HRM 记录起点的 R-R 信号要进行匹配。使用 Bland-Altman 图比较 Holter(金标准)和 Polar HRM 在两种体位下的记录。使用非配对 t 检验比较两种系统的测量结果。显著性以 p < 0.05 为标准:结果:在同等条件下(仰卧和站立),两种系统的 R-R 测量值没有明显差异。结论:两种记录和分析系统(Holter 和 Holter)在相同条件下的 R-R 测量值无明显差异:结论:两种记录和分析系统(Holter 与 HRM)得出的结果具有可比性。结论:两种记录和分析系统(Holter 与 HRM)得出的结果具有可比性,因此,这两种系统在测量正交挑战心率变异反应的心率变异分析中似乎都是有效和可互换的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International journal of exercise science
International journal of exercise science Health Professions-Occupational Therapy
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信