Agreement between two photoplethysmography-based wearable devices for monitoring heart rate during different physical activity situations: a new analysis methodology.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 09 2022
14 09 2022
Historique:
received:
10
01
2022
accepted:
10
08
2022
entrez:
14
9
2022
pubmed:
15
9
2022
medline:
17
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Wearables are being increasingly used to monitor heart rate (HR). However, their usefulness for analyzing continuous HR in research or at clinical level is questionable. The aim of this study is to analyze the level of agreement between different wearables in the measurement of HR based on photoplethysmography, according to different body positions and physical activity levels, and compared to a gold-standard ECG. The proposed method measures agreement among several time scales since different wearables obtain HR at different sampling rates. Eighteen university students (10 men, 8 women; 22 ± 2.45 years old) participated in a laboratory study. Participants simultaneously wore an Apple Watch and a Polar Vantage watch. ECG was measured using a BIOPAC system. HR was recorded continuously and simultaneously by the three devices, for consecutive 5-min periods in 4 different situations: lying supine, sitting, standing and walking at 4 km/h on a treadmill. HR estimations were obtained with the maximum precision offered by the software of each device and compared by averaging in several time scales, since the wearables obtained HR at different sampling rates, although results are more detailed for 5 s and 30 s epochs. Bland-Altman (B-A) plots show that there is no noticeable difference between data from the ECG and any of the smartwatches while participants were lying down. In this position, the bias is low when averaging in both 5 s and 30 s. Differently, B-A plots show that there are differences when the situation involves some level of physical activity, especially for shorter epochs. That is, the discrepancy between devices and the ECG was greater when walking on the treadmill and during short time scales. The device showing the biggest discrepancy was the Polar Watch, and the one with the best results was the Apple Watch. We conclude that photoplethysmography-based wearable devices are suitable for monitoring HR averages at regular intervals, especially at rest, but their feasibility is debatable for a continuous analysis of HR for research or clinical purposes, especially when involving some level of physical activity. An important contribution of this work is a new methodology to synchronize and measure the agreement against a gold standard of two or more devices measuring HR at different and not necessarily even paces.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36104356
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-18356-9
pii: 10.1038/s41598-022-18356-9
pmc: PMC9474518
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
15448Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
pubmed: 2868172
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Sep 20;18(9):e253
pubmed: 27651304
J Med Eng Technol. 2015;39(5):264-71
pubmed: 26112379
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017 Mar 16;5(3):e34
pubmed: 28302596
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017 Dec;49(12):2600-2607
pubmed: 29135785
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Mar 19;7(3):e11889
pubmed: 30888332
Physiol Meas. 2016 Jan;37(1):128-44
pubmed: 26657196
Physiol Behav. 2004 Jan;80(4):449-58
pubmed: 14741229
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Feb 15;7(2):e11606
pubmed: 30767904
Phys Rev Lett. 2001 Oct 15;87(16):168105
pubmed: 11690251
PLoS One. 2018 Feb 28;13(2):e0192691
pubmed: 29489850
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017 Aug;49(8):1697-1703
pubmed: 28709155
NPJ Digit Med. 2020 Feb 10;3:18
pubmed: 32047863
JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Jan 1;2(1):104-106
pubmed: 27732703
Int J Sports Med. 2005 Jan-Feb;26(1):39-44
pubmed: 15643533
Br J Sports Med. 2021 Jul;55(14):767-779
pubmed: 33397674
Int J Sports Med. 2010 May;31(5):336-41
pubmed: 20180175
J Sports Sci. 2019 Jun;37(12):1411-1419
pubmed: 30657025
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1985 Mar;32(3):230-6
pubmed: 3997178
Physiol Meas. 2020 May 07;41(4):04NT01
pubmed: 32217820
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Apr 30;6(4):e102
pubmed: 29712629
Int J Biosens Bioelectron. 2018;4(4):195-202
pubmed: 30906922
Physiol Behav. 2016 May 1;158:143-9
pubmed: 26969518
J Sports Sci Med. 2016 Aug 05;15(3):540-547
pubmed: 27803634
NPJ Digit Med. 2020 Jun 26;3:90
pubmed: 32613085
Sports (Basel). 2020 Aug 23;8(9):
pubmed: 32842476