Mads Christian Frederiksen Hostrup, Anne Sofie Nielsen, Freja Emborg Sørensen, Jesper Overgaard Kragballe, Morten Ugilt Østergaard, Emil Korsgaard, Samuel Emil Schmidt, Dan Stieper Karbing
{"title":"Accelerometer-based estimation of respiratory rate using principal component analysis and autocorrelation.","authors":"Mads Christian Frederiksen Hostrup, Anne Sofie Nielsen, Freja Emborg Sørensen, Jesper Overgaard Kragballe, Morten Ugilt Østergaard, Emil Korsgaard, Samuel Emil Schmidt, Dan Stieper Karbing","doi":"10.1088/1361-6579/adbe23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>
Respiratory rate (RR) is an important vital sign but is often neglected. Multiple technologies exist for RR monitoring but are either expensive or impractical. Tri-axial accelerometry represents a minimally intrusive solution for continuous RR monitoring, however, the method has not been validated in a wide RR range. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the agreement between RR estimation from a tri-axial accelerometer and a reference method in a wide RR range. 

Approach.
Twenty-five healthy participants were recruited. For accelerometer RR estimation, the accelerometer was placed on the abdomen for optimal breathing movement detection. The acquired accelerometry data were processed using a lowpass filter, principal component analysis (PCA), and autocorrelation. The subjects were instructed to breathe at slow, normal, and fast paces in segments of 60 seconds. A flow meter was used as reference.

Main results.
Furthermore, the PCA-autocorrelation method was compared with a similar single axis method. The PCA-autocorrelation method resulted in a bias of 0.0 breaths per minute (bpm) and limits of agreement (LOA) = [-1.9; 1.9 bpm] compared to the reference. Overall, 99% of the RRs estimated by the PCAautocorrelation method were within ±2 bpm of the reference. A Pearson correlation indicated a very strong correlation with r = 0.99 (p<0.001). The single axis method resulted in a bias of 3.7 bpm, LOA = [-14.9; 22.3 bpm], and r = 0.44 (p<0.001). 

Significance.
The results indicate a strong agreement between the PCA-autocorrelation method and the reference. Furthermore, the PCA-autocorrelation method outperformed the single axis method.</p>","PeriodicalId":20047,"journal":{"name":"Physiological measurement","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiological measurement","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6579/adbe23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective:
Respiratory rate (RR) is an important vital sign but is often neglected. Multiple technologies exist for RR monitoring but are either expensive or impractical. Tri-axial accelerometry represents a minimally intrusive solution for continuous RR monitoring, however, the method has not been validated in a wide RR range. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the agreement between RR estimation from a tri-axial accelerometer and a reference method in a wide RR range.
Approach.
Twenty-five healthy participants were recruited. For accelerometer RR estimation, the accelerometer was placed on the abdomen for optimal breathing movement detection. The acquired accelerometry data were processed using a lowpass filter, principal component analysis (PCA), and autocorrelation. The subjects were instructed to breathe at slow, normal, and fast paces in segments of 60 seconds. A flow meter was used as reference.
Main results.
Furthermore, the PCA-autocorrelation method was compared with a similar single axis method. The PCA-autocorrelation method resulted in a bias of 0.0 breaths per minute (bpm) and limits of agreement (LOA) = [-1.9; 1.9 bpm] compared to the reference. Overall, 99% of the RRs estimated by the PCAautocorrelation method were within ±2 bpm of the reference. A Pearson correlation indicated a very strong correlation with r = 0.99 (p<0.001). The single axis method resulted in a bias of 3.7 bpm, LOA = [-14.9; 22.3 bpm], and r = 0.44 (p<0.001).
Significance.
The results indicate a strong agreement between the PCA-autocorrelation method and the reference. Furthermore, the PCA-autocorrelation method outperformed the single axis method.
期刊介绍:
Physiological Measurement publishes papers about the quantitative assessment and visualization of physiological function in clinical research and practice, with an emphasis on the development of new methods of measurement and their validation.
Papers are published on topics including:
applied physiology in illness and health
electrical bioimpedance, optical and acoustic measurement techniques
advanced methods of time series and other data analysis
biomedical and clinical engineering
in-patient and ambulatory monitoring
point-of-care technologies
novel clinical measurements of cardiovascular, neurological, and musculoskeletal systems.
measurements in molecular, cellular and organ physiology and electrophysiology
physiological modeling and simulation
novel biomedical sensors, instruments, devices and systems
measurement standards and guidelines.