Accuracy of wearable heart rate monitors in cardiac rehabilitation

To assess the accuracy of four wearable heart rate (HR) monitors in patients with established cardiovascular disease enrolled in phase II or III cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Eighty adult patients enrolled in phase II or III CR were monitored during a CR session that included exercise on a treadmill...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy Vol. 9; no. 3; pp. 262 - 271
Main Authors Etiwy, Muhammad, Akhrass, Zade, Gillinov, Lauren, Alashi, Alaa, Wang, Robert, Blackburn, Gordon, Gillinov, Stephen M., Phelan, Dermot, Gillinov, A. Marc, Houghtaling, Penny L., Javadikasgari, Hoda, Desai, Milind Y.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published China AME Publishing Company 01.06.2019
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2223-3652
2223-3660
DOI10.21037/cdt.2019.04.08

Cover

More Information
Summary:To assess the accuracy of four wearable heart rate (HR) monitors in patients with established cardiovascular disease enrolled in phase II or III cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Eighty adult patients enrolled in phase II or III CR were monitored during a CR session that included exercise on a treadmill and/or stationary cycle. Participants underwent HR monitoring with standard ECG limb leads, an electrocardiographic (ECG) chest strap monitor (Polar H7), and two randomly assigned wrist-worn HR monitors (Apple Watch, Fitbit Blaze, Garmin Forerunner 235, TomTom Spark Cardio), one on each wrist. HR was recorded at rest and at 3, 5, and 7 minutes of steady-state exercise on the treadmill and stationary cycle. Across all exercise conditions, the chest strap monitor (Polar H7) had the best agreement with ECG (r =0.99) followed by the Apple Watch (r =0.80), Fitbit Blaze (r =0.78), TomTom Spark (r =0.76) and Garmin Forerunner (r =0.52). There was variability in accuracy under different exercise conditions. On the treadmill, only the Fitbit Blaze performed well (r =0.76), while on the stationary cycle, Apple Watch (r =0.89) and TomTom Spark (r =0.85) were most accurate. In cardiac patients, the accuracy of wearable, optically based HR monitors varies, and none of those tested was as accurate as an electrode-containing chest monitor. This observation has implications for in-home CR, as electrode-containing chest monitors should be used when accurate HR measurement is imperative.
Bibliography:Contributions: (I) Conception and design: L Gillinov, MY Desai, G Blackburn, D Phelan, SM Gillinov, PL Houghtaling, R Wang; (II) Administrative support: SM Gillinov, R Wang; (III) Provision of study materials or patients: M Etiwy, Z Akhrass, H Javadikasgari, A Alashi; (IV) Collection and assembly of data: None; (V) Data analysis and interpretation: PL Houghtaling, AM Gillinov, MY Desai, A Ahkrass, L Gillinov, M Etiwy; (VI) Manuscript writing: All authors; (VII) Final approval of manuscript: All authors.
ISSN:2223-3652
2223-3660
DOI:10.21037/cdt.2019.04.08