Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Comparison of foot finding methods for deriving instantaneous pulse rates from photoplethysmographic signals

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The suitability of different methods of finding the foot point of a pulse as measured using earlobe photoplethysmography during stationary conditions was investigated. Instantaneous pulse period (PP) values from PPG signals recorded from the ear in healthy volunteer subjects were compared with simultaneous ECG-derived cardiac periods (RR interval). Six methods of deriving pulse period were used, each based on a different method of finding specific landmark points on the PPG waveform. These methods included maximum and minimum value, maximum first and second derivative, ‘intersecting tangents’ and ‘diastole patching’ methods. Selected time domain HRV variables were also calculated from the PPG signals obtained using multiple methods and compared with ECG-derived HRV variables. The correlation between PPG and ECG was greatest for the intersecting tangents method compared to the other methods (RMSE = 5.69 ms, r 2 = 0.997). No significant differences between PP and RR were seen for all PPG methods, however the PRV variables derived using all methods showed significant differences to HRV, attributable to the sensitivity of PRV parameters to pulse transients and artifacts. The results suggest that the intersecting tangents method shows the most promise for extracting accurate pulse rate variability data from PPG datasets. This work has applications in other areas where pulse arrival time is a key measurement including pulse wave velocity assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shelley KH. Photoplethysmography: beyond the calculation of arterial oxygen saturation and heart rate. Anesth Analg. 2007;105:S31–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tamura T, Maeda Y, Sekine M, Yoshida M. Wearable photoplethysmographic sensors—past and present. Electronics. 2014;3:282–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Acharya UR, Joseph KP, Kannathal M, Lim CM, Suri JS. Heart rate variability: a review. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2006;44:1031–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Task force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology. Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation and clinical use. Circulation. 1996;93:1043–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Weippert M, Kumar M, Kreuzfeld S, Arndt D, Rieger A, Stoll R. Comparison of three mobile devices for measuring R–R intervals and heart rate variability: Polar S810i, Suunto t6 and an ambulatory ECG system. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010;109:779–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lu S, Zhao H, Ju K, Shin K, Lee M, Shelley KH, Chon KH. Can photoplethysmography variability serve as an alternative approach to obtain heart rate variability information? J Clin Monit Comput. 2008;22:23–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bolanos M, Nazeran H, Haltiwanger E. Comparison of heart rate variability signal features derived from electrocardiography and photoplethysmography in healthy individuals. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2006;1:4289–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Constant I, Laude D, Murat I, Elghozi J. Pulse rate variability is not a surrogate for heart rate variability. Clin Sci. 1999;97:391–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gil E, Orini M, Bailón R, Vergara JM, Mainardi L, Laguna P. Photoplethysmography pulse rate variability as a surrogate measurement of heart rate variability during non-stationary conditions. Physiol Meas. 2010;31:1271–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Khandoker AH, Karmakar CK, Palaniswami M. Comparison of pulse rate variability with heart rate variability during obstructive sleep apnea. Med Eng Phys. 2011;33:204–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lu G, Yang F, Taylor JA, Stein JF. A comparison of photoplethysmography and ECG recording to analyse heart rate variability in healthy subjects. J Med Eng Technol. 2009;33:634–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Selvaraj N, Jaryal A, Santhosh J, Deepak K, Anand S. Assessment of heart rate variability derived from finger-tip photoplethysmography as compared to electrocardiography. J Med Eng Technol. 2008;32:479–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wong J, Lu W, Wu K, Liu M, Chen G, Kuo C. A comparative study of pulse rate variability and heart rate variability in healthy subjects. J Clin Monit Comput. 2012;26:107–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chui YC, Arand PW, Shroff SG, Feldman T, Carroll JD. Determination of pulse wave velocities with computerized algorithms. Am Heart J. 1991;121:1460–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kazanavicius E, Gircys R, Vrubliauskas A. Mathematical methods for determining the foot point of the arterial pulse wave and evaluation of proposed methods. Inf Technol Control. 2005;34:29–36.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Millasseau SC, Stewart AD, Patel SJ, Redwood SR, Chowienczyk PJ. Evaluation of carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity: influence of timing algorithm and heart rate. Hypertension. 2005;45:222–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Phillips JP, Kyriacou PA. Comparison of methods for determining pulse arrival time from Doppler and photoplethysmography signals. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2014;1:3809–12.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Vardoulis O, Papaioannou TG, Stergiopulos N. Validation of a novel and existing algorithms for the estimation of pulse transit time: advancing the accuracy in pulse wave velocity measurement. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2013;304:H1558–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nichols W, O’Rourke M, Vlachopoulos C. McDonald’s blood flow in arteries, sixth edition: theoretical, experimental and clinical principles. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rybynok V, May JM, Budidha K, Kyriacou PA. Design and development of a novel multi-channel photoplethysmographic research system. In: IEEE point-of-care healthcare technologies. 2013.

  21. O’Haver TC, Begley T. Signal-to-noise ratio in higher order derivative spectrometry. Anal Chem. 1981;53:1876–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Phillips JP, Kyriacou PA, Jones DP, Shelley KH, Langford RM. Pulse oximetry and photoplethysmographic waveform analysis of the esophagus and bowel. Curr Opin Anesthesiol. 2008;21:779–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Justin P. Phillips.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hemon, M.C., Phillips, J.P. Comparison of foot finding methods for deriving instantaneous pulse rates from photoplethysmographic signals. J Clin Monit Comput 30, 157–168 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-015-9695-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-015-9695-6

Keywords

Navigation