Evaluation of a wrist-worn photoplethysmography monitor for heart rate variability estimation in patients recovering from laparoscopic colon resection

Abstract

To evaluate the accuracy of heart rate variability (HRV) parameters obtained with a wrist-worn photoplethysmography (PPG) monitor in patients recovering from minimally invasive colon resection to investigate whether PPG has potential in postoperative patient monitoring. 31 patients were monitored for three days or until discharge or reoperation using a wrist-worn PPG monitor (PulseOn, Finland) with a Holter monitor (Faros 360, Bittium Biosignals, Finland) as a reference measurement device. Beat-to-beat intervals (BBI) and HRV information collected by PPG were compared with RR intervals (RRI) and HRV obtained from the ECG reference after removing artefacts and ectopic beats. The beat-to-beat mean error (ME) and mean absolute error (MAE) of good quality heartbeat intervals obtained by wrist PPG were estimated as − 1.34 ms and 10.4 ms respectively. A significant variation in the accuracy of the HRV parameters was found. In the time domain, SDNN (9.11%), TRI (11.4%) and TINN (11.1%) were estimated with low relative MAE, while RMSSD (34.3%), pNN50 (139%) and NN50 (188%) had higher errors. The logarithmic parameters in the frequency domain (VLF Log, LF Log and HF Log) exhibited the lowest relative error, and for non-linear parameters, SD2 (7.5%), DFA α1 (8.25%) and DFA α2 (4.71%) were calculated much more accurately than SD1 (34.3%). The wrist PPG shows some potential for use in a clinical setting. The accuracy of several HRV parameters analyzed post hoc was found sufficient to be used in further studies concerning postoperative recovery of patients undergoing laparoscopic colon resection, although there were large errors in many common HRV parameters such as RMSSD, pNN50 and NN50, rendering them unusable.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04996511, August 9, 2021, retrospectively registered

Heart Rate Variability Measurement through a Smart Wearable Device: Another Breakthrough for Personal Health Monitoring?

“…Many studies have compared HRV measurements obtained by a wearable device with those taken by a clinical ECG system [53][54][55][56][57]. A meta-analysis that included 23 studies of HRV measurements from wearable devices showed that the HRV readings had a small absolute error when compared to readings using a clinical ECG; however, this error was considered acceptable, given the practicality and cost-effectiveness of acquiring HRV through wearable devices [58].…”

Wearable Sensors as a Preoperative Assessment Tool: A Review

“…WS have been used to identify post-surgical cancer patients who are recovering slower than their predicted profile, this facilitates the determination of appropriate discharge dates and preventing re-admissions [ 57 ]. A wide range of wearable sensing technology has been shown to be useful for clinicians in the postoperative setting including chest patches and wrist-based fitness sensors [ 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 ]. In the preoperative period, initial research has reported similar successful applications of WS.…”

Monitoring Thoracic Surgery Patients: A Heart Rate Variability Perspective on Postoperative Recovery and Therapeutic Interventions

“…It can be helpful for the prediction of post-surgery complications [4] [5] [6], evaluating arrhythmias [7] and post-surgery therapeutic intervention [8]. HRV can be accurately obtained through different non-invasive techniques such as electrocardiography (ECG), optical heart rate monitoring (OHR) and bed-integrated ballistocardiography (BCG) [9] [10] [11].…”