Variability analysis for noisy physiological signals: A simulation study

Physiological monitoring is prone to artifacts originating from various sources such as motion, device malfunction, and interference. The artifact occurrence not only elevates false alarm rates in clinics but also complicates data analysis in research. When techniques to characterize signal dynamics and the underlying physiology are applied (e.g., heart rate variability), noise and artifacts can produce misleading results that describe the signal artifacts more than the physiology. Signal quality metrics can be applied to identify signal segments with noise and artifacts that would otherwise lead analyses to produce non-physiologic or misleading results. In this study we utilized simulated electrocardiogram signals and artifacts to demonstrate effects of noise on heart rate variability frequency domain methods. We then used these simulations to assess an automated artifact correction algorithm that included a signal quality index comparing electrocardiogram beats to a beat template. Simulation results show that the proposed algorithm can significantly improve estimation of signal spectra in presence of various artifacts. This algorithm can be applied to automatically clean real world physiological time series before conducting variability analysis.

[1]  Giuseppe Baselli,et al.  A review of methods for the signal quality assessment to improve reliability of heart rate and blood pressures derived parameters , 2016, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing.

[2]  Patrick E. McSharry,et al.  A realistic coupled nonlinear artificial ECG, BP, and respiratory signal generator for assessing noise performance of biomedical signal processing algorithms , 2004, SPIE International Symposium on Fluctuations and Noise.

[3]  Willis J. Tompkins,et al.  A Real-Time QRS Detection Algorithm , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[4]  D. Strauss,et al.  Assessing ECG signal quality indices to discriminate ECGs with artefacts from pathologically different arrhythmic ECGs , 2016, Physiological measurement.

[5]  David A. Clifton,et al.  Signal-Quality Indices for the Electrocardiogram and Photoplethysmogram: Derivation and Applications to Wireless Monitoring , 2015, IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics.

[6]  Xuan Zeng,et al.  A novel machine learning-enabled framework for instantaneous heart rate monitoring from motion-artifact-corrupted electrocardiogram signals , 2016, Physiological measurement.

[7]  A. Reisner,et al.  Is heart rate variability better than routine vital signs for prehospital identification of major hemorrhage? , 2015, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[8]  A. Malliani,et al.  Heart rate variability. Standards of measurement, physiological interpretation, and clinical use , 1996 .

[9]  J. Scargle.  Studies in astronomical time series analysis. II - Statistical aspects of spectral analysis of unevenly spaced data , 1982 .

[10]  Qiao Li,et al.  Artificial arterial blood pressure artifact models and an evaluation of a robust blood pressure and heart rate estimator , 2009, Biomedical engineering online.

[11]  J. Chvojka,et al.  Heart Rate Variability in Porcine Progressive Peritonitis-Induced Sepsis , 2016, Front. Physiol..

[12]  Manuchehr Soleimani,et al.  Medical imaging and physiological modelling: linking physics and biology , 2009, Biomedical engineering online.

[13]  Philip de Chazal,et al.  Reducing false arrhythmia alarms in the ICU using multimodal signals and robust QRS detection , 2016, Physiological measurement.

[14]  V. Novack,et al.  The prevalence and significance of abnormal vital signs prior to in-hospital cardiac arrest. , 2016, Resuscitation.