2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10545/621423
Title:
Heart rate variability
Authors:
Giles, David ( 0000-0002-5590-5734 ) ; Draper, Nick ( 0000-0002-4466-3792 )
Abstract:
There is a need for standard practice in the collection and processing of RR interval data recorded using heart rate monitors (HRM) in research. This paper assessed the validity of (a) RR intervals and heart rate variability (HRV) data obtained using a HRM during incremental exercise, and (b) artefact correction methods. Eighteen participants completed an active orthostatic test and incremental running V̇O2MAX test, while simultaneous recordings using the V800 and an electrocardiogram were made. Artefacts were corrected by deletion; degree zero, linear, cubic and spline interpolation; and using Kubios HRV software. Agreement was assessed using percentage bias and effect size (ES), intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland–Altman limits of agreement (LoA). The number of artefacts increased relative to the intensity of the exercise, to a peak of 4.46% during 80-100% V̇O2MAX. Correction of RR intervals was necessary with unacceptably increased percentage bias, LoA and ES and reduced ICC in all but supine and standing recordings. All correction methods resulted in data with reduced percentage bias and ES for resting and <60% V̇O2MAX exercise recordings. However, at >60% V̇O2MAX, even when correction methods were applied, large amounts of variation were present in RMSSD, LF:HF ratio, SD1 and SampEn. Linear interpolation produced corrected RR intervals with the lowest bias and ES. However, caution should be given to HRV parameters at high exercise intensities, as large amounts of variation were still present. Recommendations for minimising recording artefacts are discussed, along with guidelines for their identification, correction and reporting.
Affiliation:
University of Derby; University of Canterbury
Citation:
Giles, D. and Draper, N. (2017) 'Heart Rate Variability' Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001800
Publisher:
Wolters Kluwer
Journal:
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Issue Date:
2017
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10545/621423
DOI:
10.1519/JSC.0000000000001800
Additional Links:
http://Insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00124278-900000000-96144
Type:
Article
Language:
en
ISSN:
10648011
Sponsors:
N/A
Appears in Collections:
Department of Life Sciences

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorGiles, Daviden
dc.contributor.authorDraper, Nicken
dc.date.accessioned2017-02-20T09:47:56Z-
dc.date.available2017-02-20T09:47:56Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationGiles, D. and Draper, N. (2017) 'Heart Rate Variability' Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001800en
dc.identifier.issn10648011-
dc.identifier.doi10.1519/JSC.0000000000001800-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10545/621423-
dc.description.abstractThere is a need for standard practice in the collection and processing of RR interval data recorded using heart rate monitors (HRM) in research. This paper assessed the validity of (a) RR intervals and heart rate variability (HRV) data obtained using a HRM during incremental exercise, and (b) artefact correction methods. Eighteen participants completed an active orthostatic test and incremental running V̇O2MAX test, while simultaneous recordings using the V800 and an electrocardiogram were made. Artefacts were corrected by deletion; degree zero, linear, cubic and spline interpolation; and using Kubios HRV software. Agreement was assessed using percentage bias and effect size (ES), intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland–Altman limits of agreement (LoA). The number of artefacts increased relative to the intensity of the exercise, to a peak of 4.46% during 80-100% V̇O2MAX. Correction of RR intervals was necessary with unacceptably increased percentage bias, LoA and ES and reduced ICC in all but supine and standing recordings. All correction methods resulted in data with reduced percentage bias and ES for resting and <60% V̇O2MAX exercise recordings. However, at >60% V̇O2MAX, even when correction methods were applied, large amounts of variation were present in RMSSD, LF:HF ratio, SD1 and SampEn. Linear interpolation produced corrected RR intervals with the lowest bias and ES. However, caution should be given to HRV parameters at high exercise intensities, as large amounts of variation were still present. Recommendations for minimising recording artefacts are discussed, along with guidelines for their identification, correction and reporting.en
dc.description.sponsorshipN/Aen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherWolters Kluweren
dc.relation.urlhttp://Insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00124278-900000000-96144en
dc.rightsArchived with thanks to Journal of Strength and Conditioning Researchen
dc.subjectHeart rate variabilityen
dc.subjectArtefactsen
dc.subjectExerciseen
dc.subjectTime domain analysisen
dc.subjectFrequency domain analysisen
dc.subjectNon-linear analysisen
dc.titleHeart rate variabilityen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Derbyen
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Canterburyen
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Strength and Conditioning Researchen
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Creative Commons
All Items in UDORA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.