TY - JOUR
T1 - Capacitive ECG Monitoring in Cardiac Patients During Simulated Driving
AU - Leicht, Lennart
AU - Skobel, Erik
AU - Knackstedt, Christian
AU - Mathissen, Marcel
AU - Sitter, Angela
AU - Wartzek, Tobias
AU - Moehler, Werner
AU - Reith, Sebastian
AU - Leonhardt, Steffen
AU - Teichmann, Daniel
N1 - Funding Information:
Manuscript received July 8, 2017; revised December 21, 2017 and April 6, 2018; accepted June 30, 2018. Date of publication July 12, 2018; date of current version February 18, 2019. This work was supported by the Ford Motor Company, Ford Research And Innovation Center Aachen, Aachen, Germany. (Corresponding author: Lennart Leicht.) L. Leicht is with the Philips Chair for Medical Information Technology, Aachen D-52074, Germany (e-mail:,[email protected]). E. Skobel is with the Rosenquelle Rehabilitation Clinic Aachen. C. Knackstedt is with the Maastricht University Medical Center. M. Mathissen and A. Sitter are with the Ford Motor Company, Ford Research And Innovation Center Aachen. T. Wartzek, S. Leonhardt, and D. Teichmann are with the Philips Chair for Medical Information Technology. W. Möhler is with the Dr. Möhler und Görtz Sachverständigenbüro für Unfallrekonstruktion (consultant company for accident reconstruction). S. Reith is with the University Hospital Aachen. Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TBME.2018.2855661
Funding Information:
This work was supported by the FordMotor Company, Ford Research And Innovation Center Aachen.
Publisher Copyright:
© 1964-2012 IEEE.
PY - 2019/3
Y1 - 2019/3
N2 - Objective: This study aims to compare the informative value of a capacitively coupled electrocardiogram (cECG) to a conventional galvanic reference ECG (rECG) in patients after a major cardiac event under simulated driving conditions. Addressed research questions are the comparison and coherence of cECG and rECG by means of the signal quality, the artifact rate, the rate of assessable data for differential diagnosis, the visibility of characteristic ECG structures in cECG, the precision of ECG time intervals, and heart rate (in particular, despite possible waveform deformations due to the cardiac preconditions). Methods: In a clinical trial, cECG and rECG data were recorded from ten patients after a major cardiac event. The cECG and rECG data were blindly evaluated by two cardiologists with regard to signal quality, artifacts, assessable data for differential diagnosis, visibility of ECG structures, and ECG time intervals. The results were statistically compared. Results: The cECG presented with more artifacts, an inferior signal quality, and less assessable data. However, when the data were assessable, determination of the ECG interval lengths was coherent to the one obtained from the rECG. Conclusion: When the signal quality is sufficient, the cECG yields the same informative value as the rECG. Significance: For certain scenarios, cECG might replace rECG systems. Hence, it is an important research question whether a similar amount of information can be obtained using a cECG system.
AB - Objective: This study aims to compare the informative value of a capacitively coupled electrocardiogram (cECG) to a conventional galvanic reference ECG (rECG) in patients after a major cardiac event under simulated driving conditions. Addressed research questions are the comparison and coherence of cECG and rECG by means of the signal quality, the artifact rate, the rate of assessable data for differential diagnosis, the visibility of characteristic ECG structures in cECG, the precision of ECG time intervals, and heart rate (in particular, despite possible waveform deformations due to the cardiac preconditions). Methods: In a clinical trial, cECG and rECG data were recorded from ten patients after a major cardiac event. The cECG and rECG data were blindly evaluated by two cardiologists with regard to signal quality, artifacts, assessable data for differential diagnosis, visibility of ECG structures, and ECG time intervals. The results were statistically compared. Results: The cECG presented with more artifacts, an inferior signal quality, and less assessable data. However, when the data were assessable, determination of the ECG interval lengths was coherent to the one obtained from the rECG. Conclusion: When the signal quality is sufficient, the cECG yields the same informative value as the rECG. Significance: For certain scenarios, cECG might replace rECG systems. Hence, it is an important research question whether a similar amount of information can be obtained using a cECG system.
KW - Capacitive ECG
KW - automotive environment
KW - driving experiment
KW - cardiac condition
KW - SYSTEM
KW - ELECTRODE
KW - FATIGUE
KW - SENSOR
U2 - 10.1109/TBME.2018.2855661
DO - 10.1109/TBME.2018.2855661
M3 - Article
C2 - 30004869
SN - 0018-9294
VL - 66
SP - 749
EP - 758
JO - Ieee Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
JF - Ieee Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
IS - 3
ER -