International journal of exercise science · 2024
Validity of a Heart Rate Monitor for Heart Rate Variability Analysis During an Orthostatic Challenge.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Soto-Catalan Christian, Comtois Alain-S, Martin David, Leclerc Suzanne
Аннотация
UNLABELLED: 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.
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.