4.5 Article

A new method for removal of powerline interference in ECG and EEG recordings

Journal

COMPUTERS & ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 45, Issue -, Pages 235-248

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2014.12.006

Keywords

Electromagnetic interference; Powerline; Biomedical signals; Radial basic function; Wiener filter

Funding

  1. University of Castilla-La Mancha, Virgen de la Luz Hospital of Cuenca (Spain)
  2. Castilla-La Mancha Research Scheme [PPII-2014-024-P]
  3. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [PI10/01215]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Advanced medical diagnosing and research requires precise information which can be obtained from measured electrophysiological data, e.g., electroencephalogram (EEG) and electrocardiograph (ECG). However, they are often contaminated with noise and a variety of bioelectric signals called artefacts, e.g., electromyography (EMG). These noise and artefacts which need to be reduced make it difficult to distinguish normal from abnormal physiological activity. Electromagnetic contamination of recorded signals represents a major source of noise in electrophysiology and impairs the use of recordings for research. In this paper we present an effective method for cancelling 50 Hz (or 60 Hz) interference using a radial basis function (RBF) Wiener hybrid filter. One of the main points of this paper is the hybridization of the RBF filter and a Wiener filter to make full use of both merits. The effectiveness and validity of those filters are verified by applying them to ECG and EEG recordings. The results show that the proposed method is able to reduce powerline interference (PLI) from the noisy ECG and EEG signals more accurately and consistently in comparison to some of the state of-the-art methods and this method can be efficiently used with very low signal-to-noise ratios, while preserving original signal waveform. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available