Check it Out!    
RideCamp@endurance.net
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index]

Re: RC: Pulse Taking at PAC



Rather then go into a long dialog, Lindia covered the major points
quite well, I will provide some background and a general summary of the
use of electronic HRM devices.

I was contacted over a year ago by the PAC OC. They asked me what I
thought of using the electronic HRM devices for this year's PAC.
My initial thought was there would be no way the 'officials' would ever
approve this. I also expected rider objections.

The ACCURACY is NOT an issue- event though there are many who THINK
these devices we are using are not accurate. The point I have made in
a paper was I have PROOF of accuracy, the objectors have none.
So ACCURACY aside, the devices WHEN USED CORRECTLY are going to give
the correct and accurate HR.

The equipment I use , as Linda did explain quite well, does take 12
seconds to fill the buffers and present a valid HR. The device then
continues to take a 2 second sample and perform a rolling 2 second
average across 12 seconds worth of data. Quite a bit more accurate
then the manual stethoscope method.

I should mention that not ALL the current HRM devices on the market perform the 2 second update. A few
take up to 5 to 7 seconds and one does the reading based on a fixed
number of pulses then computes the time.
I prefer the 2 sec update devices.

The decision to use electronic monitoring was spurred by the most noted
61 BPM pulse from the LAST PAC in Canada, where we all saw Christy and
Tang get hit with a 20 minute penalty while in second place.

The use of this device removed HUMAN count error.

We had to work out a sample method that would 'please' all the vets and
officials. A unit was tested by members of the OC last year, and
accepted as a suitable method/device to obtain the HR.

While a few or maybe many, were quite skeptical the device would be
correct (the concern was not related to the accuracy), but would the
unit display the correct pulse at a given point in time. The tests
preformed by many of the vets at the PAC resolved most issues.

The next issue was when to take a 'reading'. The 15 second read point was
based on the read point of the count derived by a stethoscope.
It takes a KNOWLEDGEABLE pulse taker about 5 seconds to find the HR -
lub-dub, get the count in sync, wait for the TIME to hit the QTR
points of 00.15.30.45, then start the 15 sec count.
We all ASSUME the  counter KNOWS NOT to count the pulse at 00 AND 15, but many do.

The 4 samples of 15 seconds and note reading AFTER each 15 second
point, equates to the SAME process used today. Count the lub-dub for 15sec if 16, keep counting
up to a full minute in 15 sec increments. Some takers use 30 seconds.

We changed from 30 to 15, to match this process AND to address a horse
that may move away from the device and lose the reading. The same problem
occurs with the stethoscope. Then we have to re-find the HR and start
over. Most pulse takers were able to 'dance' or  move with the horse and
keep a good electrical contact and did not lose the reading.

The purpose of all this process was to develop a fair and equal method of taking the
HR for the horses/rider without making the volunteer the 'bad guy'.

No rider complained. I heard only 2 horses failed the 60 second
reading, they were eliminated at that check. No one who was fit to go
on was penalized with a 'bad' hr. A few - I heard 2 - horse were
difficult to read due to the shape of the girth barrel. A vet was at
the head of all the pulse lanes, who would jump in and take a 15 sec
pulse IF the pulse taker was having a problem.

The pulse takers were all relaxed and it was reported riders were quite
comfortable with this process.
One cool story -  rider came into the lane , announced the HR was 60
and has been all day. The taker bent over to take the pulse, asked the
rider if the monitor on his wrist was reading 60 now. WHY YES. The
pulse taker QUITELY told the rider to remove the ANALOG watch on the
SAME wrist with the monitor. Ride did so, was reported to look a bit
pale. Been going all day reading the TIME CLOCK for a HR of 60. Horse
passed with 52. Its in the User Guide to NOT wear a battery analog
time clock with the monitor, but who reads directions anyway?

It has been my position the pulse takers are there to do just that, get
a number. We are NOT required to listen to the quality of the heart,
look for any abnormality or any medical issue. The vets do that.

I got little to NO feedback from ANY vets, which of course was a bit
disappointing.

There were NO backups with the pulse lanes but in VC 2 we did over
load the vets. I was in that pileup. Got my foot stomped on just
before I was trot out my horse ( I was Groom for Mary Kornwolf/Shiloh
USA East)

The end result was the device and the process was proven valid.
I am sure this will help all the vendors and manufactures of these
type of devices.
I was not compensated in any way for providing these units to the OC.
OPS - yes I was in the trade show. It should be noted that nowhere
was our product or name mentioned in the credits. MAY have been nice?

I wanted to prove the concept of electronic HR monitoring and the
devices were accurate and valid.  We eliminated HUMAN error.

The French and Italian FEI rides are using electronic HRM devices.

  When objections were voiced, I wanted to just forget the whole thing.
The OC decided all the objections would be resolved.

Thanks to Donna Curtain and Dr Jerry Gillespie and Ruth Carlson for
their support in this effort.

Roger Rittenhouse



    Check it Out!    

Home    Events    Groups    Rider Directory    Market    RideCamp    Stuff

Back to TOC