Electrocardiographic motion artifact versus electrode impedance

Author

Wiese, Scott R. ; Anheier, Paul ; Connemara, Rafael D. ; Mollner, Anna T. ; Neils, Thomas F. ; Kahn, Joshua A. ; Webster, John G.

Author_Institution

Dept. of Biomed. Eng., Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

Volume

52

Issue

1

fYear

2005

Firstpage

136

Lastpage

139

Abstract

We degraded electrocardiographic electrodes by exposing them to air for four days and evaluated them on 12 subjects. After application, we recorded the electrocardiogram (including motion artifact), missed QRS detections and electrode impedance during 5 min of arm and body movements. Missed QRS detections increased with electrode impedance but correlation was poor. Increased electrode impedance was not a reliable predictor of a poor electrode and the need to replace it.

Keywords

biomechanics; biomedical electrodes; electrocardiography; medical signal detection; medical signal processing; 4 day; 5 min; arm movements; body movements; electrocardiographic motion artifact; electrode degradation; electrode impedance; missed QRS detections; Biomedical electrodes; Biomedical engineering; Biomedical monitoring; Degradation; Electrocardiography; Heart beat; Impedance; Patient monitoring; Signal processing algorithms; Skin; Artifact; ECG; cardiac monitor; electrocardiogram; electrode; impedance; lead; motion artifact; Adult; Aged; Artifacts; Electric Impedance; Electrocardiography; Electrodes; Equipment Failure Analysis; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Movement; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity;

fLanguage

English

Journal_Title

Biomedical Engineering, IEEE Transactions on

Publisher

ieee

ISSN

0018-9294

Type

jour

DOI

10.1109/TBME.2004.836503

Filename

1369599