Nejvíce citovaný článek - PubMed ID 2186997
Compression of ECG signal is essential especially in the area of signal transmission in telemedicine. There exist many compression algorithms which are described in various details, tested on various datasets and their performance is expressed by different ways. There is a lack of standardization in this area. This study points out these drawbacks and presents new compression algorithm which is properly described, tested and objectively compared with other authors. This study serves as an example how the standardization should look like. Single-cycle fractal-based (SCyF) compression algorithm is introduced and tested on 4 different databases-CSE database, MIT-BIH arrhythmia database, High-frequency signal and Brno University of Technology ECG quality database (BUT QDB). SCyF algorithm is always compared with well-known algorithm based on wavelet transform and set partitioning in hierarchical trees in terms of efficiency (2 methods) and quality/distortion of the signal after compression (12 methods). Detail analysis of the results is provided. The results of SCyF compression algorithm reach up to avL = 0.4460 bps and PRDN = 2.8236%.
The assessment of ECG signal quality after compression is an essential part of the compression process. Compression facilitates the signal archiving, speeds up signal transmission, and reduces the energy consumption. Conversely, lossy compression distorts the signals. Therefore, it is necessary to express the compression performance through both compression efficiency and signal quality. This paper provides an overview of objective algorithms for the assessment of both ECG signal quality after compression and compression efficiency. In this area, there is a lack of standardization, and there is no extensive review as such. 40 methods were tested in terms of their suitability for quality assessment. For this purpose, the whole CSE database was used. The tested signals were compressed using an algorithm based on SPIHT with varying efficiency. As a reference, compressed signals were manually assessed by two experts and classified into three quality groups. Owing to the experts' classification, we determined corresponding ranges of selected quality evaluation methods' values. The suitability of the methods for quality assessment was evaluated based on five criteria. For the assessment of ECG signal quality after compression, we recommend using a combination of these methods: PSim SDNN, QS, SNR1, MSE, PRDN1, MAX, STDERR, and WEDD SWT.
