Electrocardiography (ECG) is an essential technique for analyzing and monitoring cardiovascular physiological conditions such as arrhythmia. This article demonstrates the integration of screen-printed ECG circuitry from a commercially available conducting polymer, PEDOT:PSS, onto commercially available finished textiles. ECG signals were recorded in dry skin conditions due to the ability of PEDOT:PSS to function as both ionic and electronic conductors. The signal amplifies when the skin transpires water vapor or by applying a common lotion on the skin. Finally, PEDOT:PSS wires connected to PEDOT:PSS electrodes have been shown to record ECG signals comparable to Ag/AgCl connected to copper wires.

Detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) from a wrist watch photoplethysmogram (PPG) signal is important because the wrist watch form factor enables long term continuous monitoring of arrhythmia in an easy and non-invasive manner. We have developed a novel method not only to detect AF from a smart wrist watch PPG signal, but also to determine whether the recorded PPG signal is corrupted by motion artifacts or not. We detect motion and noise artifacts based on the accelerometer signal and variable frequency complex demodulation based time-frequency analysis of the PPG signal. After that, we use the root mean square of successive differences and sample entropy, calculated from the beat-to-beat intervals of the PPG signal, to distinguish AF from normal rhythm. We then use a premature atrial contraction detection algorithm to have more accurate AF identification and to reduce false alarms. Two separate datasets have been used in this study to test the efficacy of the proposed method, which shows a combined sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 98.18%, 97.43% and 97.54% across the datasets.

We developed an automated approach to differentiate between different types of arrhythmic episodes in electrocardiogram (ECG) signals, because, in real-life scenarios, a software application does not know in advance the type of arrhythmia a patient experiences. Our approach has four main stages: (1) Classification of ventricular fibrillation (VF) versus non-VF segments—including atrial fibrillation (AF), ventricular tachycardia (VT), normal sinus rhythm (NSR), and sinus arrhythmias, such as bigeminy, trigeminy, quadrigeminy, couplet, triplet—using four image-based phase plot features, one frequency domain feature, and the Shannon entropy index. (2) Classification of AF versus non-AF segments. (3) Premature ventricular contraction (PVC) detection on every non-AF segment, using a time domain feature, a frequency domain feature, and two features that characterize the nonlinearity of the data. (4) Determination of the PVC patterns, if present, to categorize distinct types of sinus arrhythmias and NSR. We used the Massachusetts Institute of Technology-Beth Israel Hospital (MIT-BIH) arrhythmia database, Creighton University’s VT arrhythmia database, the MIT-BIH atrial fibrillation database, and the MIT-BIH malignant ventricular arrhythmia database to test our algorithm. Binary decision tree (BDT) and support vector machine (SVM) classifiers were used in both stage 1 and stage 3. We also compared our proposed algorithm’s performance to other published algorithms. Our VF detection algorithm was accurate, as in balanced datasets (and unbalanced, in parentheses) it provided an accuracy of 95.1% (97.1%), sensitivity of 94.5% (91.1%), and specificity of 94.2% (98.2%). The AF detection was accurate, as the sensitivity and specificity in balanced datasets (and unbalanced, in parentheses) were found to be 97.8% (98.6%) and 97.21% (97.1%), respectively. Our PVC detection algorithm was also robust, as the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were found to be 99% (98.1%), 98.0% (96.2%), and 98.4% (99.4%), respectively, for balanced and (unbalanced) datasets.

Background Because chest compressions induce artifacts in the ECG, current automated external defibrillators instruct the user to stop cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) while an automated rhythm analysis is performed. It has been shown that minimizing interruptions in CPR increases the chance of survival. Methods and Results The objective of this study was to apply a deep‐learning algorithm using convolutional layers, residual networks, and bidirectional long short‐term memory method to classify shockable versus nonshockable rhythms in the presence and absence of CPR artifact. Forty subjects' data from Physionet with 1131 shockable and 2741 nonshockable samples contaminated with 43 different CPR artifacts that were acquired from a commercial automated external defibrillator during asystole were used. We had separate data as train and test sets. Using our deep neural network model, the sensitivity and specificity of the shock versus no‐shock decision for the entire data set over the 4‐fold cross‐validation sets were 95.21% and 86.03%, respectively. This result was based on the training and testing of the model using ECG data in both the presence and the absence of CPR artifact. For ECG without CPR artifact, the sensitivity was 99.04% and the specificity was 95.2%. A sensitivity of 94.21% and a specificity of 86.14% were obtained for ECG with CPR artifact. In addition to 4‐fold cross‐validation sets, we also examined leave‐one‐subject‐out validation. The sensitivity and specificity for the case of leave‐one‐subject‐out validation were 92.71% and 97.6%, respectively. Conclusions The proposed trained model can make shock versus nonshock decision in automated external defibrillators, regardless of CPR status. The results meet the American Heart Association's sensitivity requirement (>90%).

No abstract