Health and Technology

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 99–109 | Cite as

A non invasive, wearable sensor platform for multi-parametric remote monitoring in CHF patients

  • Héctor Solar
  • Erik Fernández
  • Gennaro Tartarisco
  • Giovanni Pioggia
  • Božidara Cvetković
  • Simon Kozina
  • Mitja Luštrek
  • Jure Lampe
Review Paper


There is an increasing need to find new ways of managing the European healthcare models due to the demographic and socio-economic challenges that result from the fast ageing of the population. In particular, the increasing number of elderly people directly entails an increasing number of patients with cardiovascular diseases and, in particular, with Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) issues. Although with limited physical activity, this type of patients usually remains at home, outside the hospital environment. However, this disease causes that their health status continues to worsen with episodes of crisis leading to acute deterioration. These episodes, which require emergency and long-time hospital admissions, are always preceded by noticeable changes in several physiological parameters. In this context, accurate and reliable remote monitoring solutions based on state-of-the-art technologies take a main role in order to predict the deterioration of CHF patients and improve their quality of life. In the present paper a prototype of an implemented non-invasive, wearable sensor platform for Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) patients is shown and described. The platform monitors all the required parameters from sensors, collects and processes the data in a mobile platform and sends the data to a server. Specifically, the present solution monitors the electrocardiogram (ECG), potassium blood content (obtained from ECG), average energy expenditure evaluation through activity recognition, skin temperature and sweating. The energy expenditure for all the activities was estimated with a mean absolute error of 0.85 MET. The error on HR measurements was lower than the 10 %.


Wearable sensor platform Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) Multi-parametric monitoring Electrocardiogram (ECG) Skin temperature Sweat index Activity recognition Energy expenditure 


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Dickstein K, Cohen-Solal A, Filippatos G, et al. ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2008: the task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2008 of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:2388–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Klersy C, De Silvestri A, Gabutti G, et al. A meta-analysis of remote monitoring of heart failure patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:1683–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Puddu PE, Morgan JM, Torromeo C, Curzen N, Schiariti M, Bonfiglio S. A clinical observational study in the CHIRON project1: Rationale and expected results. Proc. of the 10th International Conference on Smart Homes and Health Telematics (ICOST), 2012. p. 74–82.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pantelopoulos A, Bourbakis NG. A survey on wearable sensor-based systems for health monitoring and prognosis. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C Appl Rev. 2010;40(no.1):1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    HeartCycle project,
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Sund-Levander M, Grodzinsky E, Loyd D, et al. Sweden errors in body temperature assessment related to individual variation, measuring technique and equipment. Int J Nurs Pract. 2004;10:216–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bao L, Intille SS. Activity recognition from User-Annotated acceleration data pervasive computing. Pervasive Comput. 2004;3001:1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Žbogar M, Gjoreski H, Kozina S, Luštrek M. Improving accelerometer based activity recognition, proc. 15th International multiconference. Inf Soc. 2012(167–170).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kozina S, Luštrek M, Gams M. Dynamical signal segmentation for activity recognition. In: Proceedings STAMI 2011, IJCAI 2011 pp. 93–98 (2011).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hall M, Frank E, Holmes G, Pfahringer B, Reutemann P, Witten IH. The WEKA data mining software: an update. SIGKDD Explor. 2009;11(1):10–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bouten CV, Westerterp KR, Verduin M, Janssen JD. Assessment of energy expenditure for physical activity using a triaxial accelerometer. J Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1994;26(12):1516–23.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kononenko I. Estimating attributes: Analysis and extensions of RELIEF. Proc. European Conference on Machine Learning, 171–182, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kozina S, Gjoreski H, Gams M, Luštrek M. Three-layer activity recognition combining domain knowledge and meta-classification. J Med Biol Eng. accepted for publication.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pan J, Tompkins WJ. A real-time QRS detection algorithm. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1985;32:230–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Herrmann SD, Meckes N, Bassett Jr DR, Tudor-Locke C, et al. Compendium of physical activities: a second update of codes and MET values. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43:1575–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IUPESM and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Héctor Solar
    • 1
  • Erik Fernández
    • 2
  • Gennaro Tartarisco
    • 3
  • Giovanni Pioggia
    • 3
  • Božidara Cvetković
    • 4
  • Simon Kozina
    • 4
  • Mitja Luštrek
    • 4
  • Jure Lampe
    • 5
  1. 1.CEITSan SebastiánSpain
  2. 2.LortekOrdiziaSpain
  3. 3.National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Institute of Clinical Physiology (IFC)PisaItaly
  4. 4.Jožef Stefan InstituteLjubljanaSlovenia
  5. 5.Mobili d.o.oLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations