Accuracy of wearable heart rate monitors in cardiac rehabilitation
| العنوان: | Accuracy of wearable heart rate monitors in cardiac rehabilitation |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Penny L. Houghtaling, Gordon Blackburn, Zade Akhrass, Robert Wang, Muhammad Etiwy, Dermot Phelan, Hoda Javadikasgari, Lauren Gillinov, A. Marc Gillinov, Alaa Alashi, Milind Y. Desai, Stephen M. Gillinov |
| المصدر: | Cardiovasc Diagn Ther |
| بيانات النشر: | AME Publishing Company, 2019. |
| سنة النشر: | 2019 |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | medicine.medical_specialty, Rehabilitation, Adult patients, business.industry, medicine.medical_treatment, Wearable computer, 030229 sport sciences, 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Internal medicine, Heart rate, Cardiology, medicine, Original Article, In patient, Erratum, Treadmill, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, business, Standard ECG |
| الوصف: | Background: 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). Methods: 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. Results: Across all exercise conditions, the chest strap monitor (Polar H7) had the best agreement with ECG (r c =0.99) followed by the Apple Watch (r c =0.80), Fitbit Blaze (r c =0.78), TomTom Spark (r c =0.76) and Garmin Forerunner (r c =0.52). There was variability in accuracy under different exercise conditions. On the treadmill, only the Fitbit Blaze performed well (r c =0.76), while on the stationary cycle, Apple Watch (r c =0.89) and TomTom Spark (r c =0.85) were most accurate. Conclusions: 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. |
| تدمد: | 2223-3660 2223-3652 |
| URL الوصول: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::d2412a9a0232f13e2d72b6adcbe7c997 https://doi.org/10.21037/cdt.2019.04.08 |
| حقوق: | OPEN |
| رقم الأكسشن: | edsair.doi.dedup.....d2412a9a0232f13e2d72b6adcbe7c997 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
| تدمد: | 22233660 22233652 |
|---|