Comparison between Chest-Worn Accelerometer and Gyroscope Performance for Heart Rate and Respiratory Rate Monitoring

The demand for wearable devices to simultaneously monitor heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) values has grown due to the incidence increase in cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. The use of inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensors, embedding both accelerometers and gyroscopes, may ensure...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Biosensors (Basel) 2022-10, Vol.12 (10), p.834
Main Authors: Romano, Chiara, Schena, Emiliano, Formica, Domenico, Massaroni, Carlo
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accelerometers
Comparative analysis
Embedding
Gyroscopes
Heart rate
Inertial platforms
Inertial sensing devices
magneto-inertial measurement units
mechanical vibrations
Microelectromechanical systems
Monitoring
Physiological aspects
Physiology
Posture
Respiration
Respiratory diseases
Respiratory rate
Sensors
Values
Velocity
wearable systems
Wearable technology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The demand for wearable devices to simultaneously monitor heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) values has grown due to the incidence increase in cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. The use of inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensors, embedding both accelerometers and gyroscopes, may ensure a non-intrusive and low-cost monitoring. While both accelerometers and gyroscopes have been assessed independently for both HR and RR monitoring, there lacks a comprehensive comparison between them when used simultaneously. In this study, we used both accelerometers and gyroscopes embedded in a single IMU sensor for the simultaneous monitoring of HR and RR. The following main findings emerged: (i) the accelerometer outperformed the gyroscope in terms of accuracy in both HR and RR estimation; (ii) the window length used to estimate HR and RR values influences the accuracy; and (iii) increasing the length over 25 s does not provide a relevant improvement, but accuracy improves when the subject is seated or lying down, and deteriorates in the standing posture. Our study provides a comprehensive comparison between two promising systems, highlighting their potentiality for real-time cardiorespiratory monitoring. Furthermore, we give new insights into the influence of window length and posture on the systems’ performance, which can be useful to spread this approach in clinical settings.
ISSN:2079-6374
2079-6374
DOI:10.3390/bios12100834