4.3 Review

Wearable sensors for ECG measurement: a review

Journal

SENSOR REVIEW
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages 412-419

Publisher

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/SR-06-2017-0110

Keywords

Capacitive coupling electrodes; Electrocardiogram (ECG); Knitted integrated sensors; Planar fashionable circuit boards; Wearable sensor; Wet electrodes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Recent developments in wearable technologies have paved the way for continuous monitoring of the electrocardiogram (ECG) signal, without the need for any laboratory settings. A number of wearable sensors ranging from wet electrode sensors to dry sensors, textile-based sensors, knitted integrated sensors (KIS) and planar fashionable circuit boards are used in ECG measurement. The purpose of this study is to carry out a comparative study of the different sensors used for ECG measurements. The current challenges faced in developing wearable ECG sensors are also reviewed. Design/methodology/approach This study carries out a comparative analysis of different wearable ECG sensors on the basis of four important aspects: materials and methods used to develop the sensors, working principle, implementation and performance. Each of the aspects has been reviewed with regard to the main types of wearable ECG sensors available. Findings A comparative study of the sensors helps understand the differences in their operating principles. While some sensors may have a higher efficiency, the others might ensure more user comfort. It is important to strike the right balance between the various aspects influencing the sensor performance. Originality/value Wearable ECG sensors have revolutionized the world of ambulatory ECG monitoring and helped in the treatment of many cardiovascular diseases. A comparative study of the available technologies will help both doctors and researchers gain an understanding of the shortcomings in the existing systems.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available