Cargando…

Validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness

BACKGROUND: Low cardiorespiratory fitness (ie, peak oxygen consumption [[Formula: see text] O(2)peak]) is associated with cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality and is recognized as an important clinical tool in the assessment of patients. Cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is the gold sta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hansen, Mikkel T., Rømer, Tue, Højgaard, Amalie, Husted, Karina, Sørensen, Kasper, Schmidt, Samuel E., Dela, Flemming, Helge, Jørn W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10577491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37850043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cvdhj.2023.08.020
_version_ 1785121340090482688
author Hansen, Mikkel T.
Rømer, Tue
Højgaard, Amalie
Husted, Karina
Sørensen, Kasper
Schmidt, Samuel E.
Dela, Flemming
Helge, Jørn W.
author_facet Hansen, Mikkel T.
Rømer, Tue
Højgaard, Amalie
Husted, Karina
Sørensen, Kasper
Schmidt, Samuel E.
Dela, Flemming
Helge, Jørn W.
author_sort Hansen, Mikkel T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Low cardiorespiratory fitness (ie, peak oxygen consumption [[Formula: see text] O(2)peak]) is associated with cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality and is recognized as an important clinical tool in the assessment of patients. Cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is the gold standard procedure for determination of [Formula: see text] O(2)peak but has methodological challenges as it is time-consuming and requires specialized equipment and trained professionals. Seismofit is a chest-mounted medical device for estimating [Formula: see text] O(2)peak at rest using seismocardiography. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of Seismofit [Formula: see text] O(2)peak estimation in a healthy population. METHODS: On 3 separate days, 20 participants (10 women) underwent estimations of [Formula: see text] O(2)peak with Seismofit (×2) and Polar Fitness Test (PFT) in randomized order and performed a graded CPET on a cycle ergometer with continuous pulmonary gas exchange measurements. RESULTS: Seismofit [Formula: see text] O(2)peak showed a significant bias of –3.1 ± 2.4 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) (mean ± 95% confidence interval) and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of ±10.8 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) compared to CPET. The mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) was 12.0%. Seismofit [Formula: see text] O(2)peak had a coefficient of variation of 4.5% ± 1.3% and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.95 between test days and a bias of 0.0 ± 0.4 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) with 95% LoA of ±1.6 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) in test–retest. In addition, Seismofit showed a 2.4 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) smaller difference in 95% LoA than PFT compared to CPET. CONCLUSION: The Seismofit is highly reliable in its estimation of [Formula: see text] O(2)peak. However, based on the measurement error and MAPE >10%, the Seismofit [Formula: see text] O(2)peak estimation model needs further improvement to be considered for use in clinical settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10577491
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105774912023-10-17 Validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness Hansen, Mikkel T. Rømer, Tue Højgaard, Amalie Husted, Karina Sørensen, Kasper Schmidt, Samuel E. Dela, Flemming Helge, Jørn W. Cardiovasc Digit Health J Original Article BACKGROUND: Low cardiorespiratory fitness (ie, peak oxygen consumption [[Formula: see text] O(2)peak]) is associated with cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality and is recognized as an important clinical tool in the assessment of patients. Cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is the gold standard procedure for determination of [Formula: see text] O(2)peak but has methodological challenges as it is time-consuming and requires specialized equipment and trained professionals. Seismofit is a chest-mounted medical device for estimating [Formula: see text] O(2)peak at rest using seismocardiography. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of Seismofit [Formula: see text] O(2)peak estimation in a healthy population. METHODS: On 3 separate days, 20 participants (10 women) underwent estimations of [Formula: see text] O(2)peak with Seismofit (×2) and Polar Fitness Test (PFT) in randomized order and performed a graded CPET on a cycle ergometer with continuous pulmonary gas exchange measurements. RESULTS: Seismofit [Formula: see text] O(2)peak showed a significant bias of –3.1 ± 2.4 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) (mean ± 95% confidence interval) and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of ±10.8 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) compared to CPET. The mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) was 12.0%. Seismofit [Formula: see text] O(2)peak had a coefficient of variation of 4.5% ± 1.3% and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.95 between test days and a bias of 0.0 ± 0.4 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) with 95% LoA of ±1.6 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) in test–retest. In addition, Seismofit showed a 2.4 mL·min(–1)·kg(–1) smaller difference in 95% LoA than PFT compared to CPET. CONCLUSION: The Seismofit is highly reliable in its estimation of [Formula: see text] O(2)peak. However, based on the measurement error and MAPE >10%, the Seismofit [Formula: see text] O(2)peak estimation model needs further improvement to be considered for use in clinical settings. Elsevier 2023-09-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10577491/ /pubmed/37850043 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cvdhj.2023.08.020 Text en © 2023 Heart Rhythm Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Hansen, Mikkel T.
Rømer, Tue
Højgaard, Amalie
Husted, Karina
Sørensen, Kasper
Schmidt, Samuel E.
Dela, Flemming
Helge, Jørn W.
Validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness
title Validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness
title_full Validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness
title_fullStr Validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness
title_full_unstemmed Validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness
title_short Validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness
title_sort validity and reliability of seismocardiography for the estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10577491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37850043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cvdhj.2023.08.020
work_keys_str_mv AT hansenmikkelt validityandreliabilityofseismocardiographyfortheestimationofcardiorespiratoryfitness
AT rømertue validityandreliabilityofseismocardiographyfortheestimationofcardiorespiratoryfitness
AT højgaardamalie validityandreliabilityofseismocardiographyfortheestimationofcardiorespiratoryfitness
AT hustedkarina validityandreliabilityofseismocardiographyfortheestimationofcardiorespiratoryfitness
AT sørensenkasper validityandreliabilityofseismocardiographyfortheestimationofcardiorespiratoryfitness
AT schmidtsamuele validityandreliabilityofseismocardiographyfortheestimationofcardiorespiratoryfitness
AT delaflemming validityandreliabilityofseismocardiographyfortheestimationofcardiorespiratoryfitness
AT helgejørnw validityandreliabilityofseismocardiographyfortheestimationofcardiorespiratoryfitness