Dataset Information

Concurrent heart rate validity of wearable technology devices during trail running.

ABSTRACT: Validation of heart rate responses in wearable technology devices is generally composed of laboratory-based protocols that are steady state in nature and as a result, high accuracy measures are returned. However, there is a need to understand device validity in applied settings that include varied intensities of exercise. The purpose was to determine concurrent heart rate validity during trail running. Twenty-one healthy participants volunteered (female n = 10, [mean (SD)]: age = 31 [11] years, height = 173.0 [7] cm, mass = 75.6 [13] kg). Participants were outfitted with wearable technology devices (Garmin Fenix 5 wristwatch, Jabra Elite Sport earbuds, Motiv ring, Scosche Rhythm+ forearm band, Suunto Spartan Sport watch with accompanying chest strap) and completed a self-paced 3.22 km trail run while concurrently wearing a criterion heart rate strap (Polar H7 heart rate monitor). The trail runs were out-and-back with the first 1.61 km in an uphill direction, and the 1.61 return being downhill in nature. Validity was determined through three methods: Mean Absolute Percent Error (MAPE), Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LOA), and Lin's Concordance Coefficient (rC). Validity measures overall are as follows: Garmin Fenix 5 (MAPE = 13%, LOA = -32 to 162, rC = 0.32), Jabra Elite Sport (MAPE = 23%, LOA = -464 to 503, rC = 0.38), Motiv ring (MAPE = 16%, LOA = -52 to 96, rC = 0.29), Scosche Rhythm+ (MAPE = 6%, LOA = -114 to 120, rC = 0.79), Suunto Spartan Sport (MAPE = 2%, LOA = -62 to 61, rC = 0.96). All photoplethysmography-based (PPG) devices displayed poor heart rate agreement during variable intensity trail running. Until technological advances occur in PPG-based devices allowing for acceptable agreement, heart rate in outdoor environments should be obtained using an ECG-based chest strap that can be connected to a wristwatch or other comparable receiver.

SUBMITTER: Navalta JW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7458324 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Concurrent heart rate validity of wearable technology devices during trail running.

Navalta James W JW Montes Jeffrey J Bodell Nathaniel G NG Salatto Robert W RW Manning Jacob W JW DeBeliso Mark M

PloS one 20200831 8

Validation of heart rate responses in wearable technology devices is generally composed of laboratory-based protocols that are steady state in nature and as a result, high accuracy measures are returned. However, there is a need to understand device validity in applied settings that include varied intensities of exercise. The purpose was to determine concurrent heart rate validity during trail running. Twenty-one healthy participants volunteered (female n = 10, [mean (SD)]: age = 31 [11] years, ...[more]

PMID: 32866216

Similar Datasets

Project description: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.

Dataset Information

Concurrent heart rate validity of wearable technology devices during trail running.

Publications

Concurrent heart rate validity of wearable technology devices during trail running.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets