Dataset Information

Validation of the Polar V800 heart rate monitor and comparison of artifact correction methods among adults with hypertension.

ABSTRACT: Heart rate variability (HRV) measurements via ambulatory monitors have become common. We examined the validity of recording R-R intervals using the Polar V800™ compared to 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECG) among middle-aged (44.7±10.1years); overweight to obese (29.8±4.3 kg.m-2) adults (n = 25) with hypertension (132.3±12.2/ 84.3±10.2 mmHg). After resting for 5-min in the supine position, R-R intervals were simultaneously recorded using the Polar V800™ and the 12-lead ECG. Artifacts present in uncorrected (UN) R-R intervals were corrected with the Kubios HRV Premium (ver. 3.2.) automatic (AC) and threshold-based (TBC) correction, and manual correction (MC) methods. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA), and effect sizes (ES) were calculated. We detected 71 errors with the Polar V800™ for an error rate of 0.85%. The bias (LoAs), ES, and ICC between UN and ECG R-R intervals were 0.69ms (-215.80 to +214.42ms), 0.004, and 0.79, respectively. Correction of artifacts improved the agreeability between the Polar V800™ and ECG HRV measures. The biases (LoAs) between the AC, TBC, and MC and ECG R-R intervals were 3.79ms (-130.32 to +137.90ms), 1.16ms (-92.67 to +94.98ms), and 0.37ms (-41.20 to +41.94ms), respectively. The ESs of AC, TBC, and MC were 0.024, 0.008, and 0.002, and ICCs were 0.91, 0.95, and 1.00, respectively. R-R intervals measured using the Polar V800™ compared to 12-lead ECG were comparable in adults with hypertension, especially after the artifacts corrected by MC. However, TBC correction also yielded acceptable results.

SUBMITTER: Cilhoroz B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7544136 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of the Polar V800 heart rate monitor and comparison of artifact correction methods among adults with hypertension.

Cilhoroz Burak B Giles David D Zaleski Amanda A Taylor Beth B Fernhall Bo B Pescatello Linda L

PloS one 20201008 10

Heart rate variability (HRV) measurements via ambulatory monitors have become common. We examined the validity of recording R-R intervals using the Polar V800™ compared to 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECG) among middle-aged (44.7±10.1years); overweight to obese (29.8±4.3 kg.m-2) adults (n = 25) with hypertension (132.3±12.2/ 84.3±10.2 mmHg). After resting for 5-min in the supine position, R-R intervals were simultaneously recorded using the Polar V800™ and the 12-lead ECG. Artifacts present in un ...[more]

PMID: 33031480

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Optical measurement techniques and recent advances in wearable technology have made heart rate (HR) sensing simpler and more affordable. OBJECTIVES:The Polar OH1 is an arm worn optical heart rate monitor. The objectives of this study are two-fold; 1) to validate the OH1 optical HR sensor with the gold standard of HR measurement, electrocardiography (ECG), over a range of moderate to high intensity physical activities, 2) to validate wearing the OH1 at the temple as an alternative location to its recommended wearing location around the forearm and upper arm. METHODS:Twenty-four individuals participated in a physical exercise protocol, by walking on a treadmill and riding a stationary spin bike at different speeds while the criterion measure, ECG and Polar OH1 HR were recorded simultaneously at three different body locations; forearm, upper arm and the temple. Time synchronised HR data points were compared using Bland-Altman analyses and intraclass correlation. RESULTS:The intraclass correlation between the ECG and Polar OH1, for the aggregated data, was 0.99 and the estimated mean bias ranged 0.27-0.33 bpm for the sensor locations. The three sensors exhibited a 95% limit of agreement (LoA: forearm 5.22, -4.68 bpm; upper arm 5.15, -4.49; temple 5.22, -4.66). The mean of the ECG HR for the aggregated data was 112.15 ± 24.52 bpm. The intraclass correlation of HR values below and above this mean were 0.98 and 0.99 respectively. The reported mean bias ranged 0.38-0.47 bpm (95% LoA: forearm 6.14, -5.38 bpm; upper arm 6.07, -5.13 bpm; temple 6.09, -5.31 bpm), and 0.15-0.16 bpm (95% LoA: forearm 3.99, -3.69 bpm; upper arm 3.90, -3.58 bpm; temple 4.06, -3.76 bpm) respectively. During different exercise intensities, the intraclass correlation ranged 0.95-0.99 for the three sensor locations. During the entire protocol, the estimated mean bias was in the range -0.15-0.55 bpm, 0.01-0.53 bpm and -0.37-0.48 bpm, for the forearm, upper arm and temple locations respectively. The corresponding upper limits of 95% LoA were 3.22-7.03 bpm, 3.25-6.82 bpm and 3.18-7.04 bpm while the lower limits of 95% LoA were -6.36-(-2.35) bpm, -6.46-(-2.30) bpm and -7.42-(-2.41) bpm. CONCLUSION:Polar OH1 demonstrates high level of agreement with the criterion measure ECG HR, thus can be used as a valid measure of HR in lab and field settings during moderate and high intensity physical activities.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Accelerometers, often in conjunction with heart rate sensors, are extensively used to track physical activity (PA) in research. Research-grade instruments are often expensive and have limited battery capacity, limited storage, and high participant burden. Consumer-based activity trackers are equipped with similar technology and designed for long-term wear, and can therefore potentially be used in research. OBJECTIVE:We aimed to assess the criterion validity of the Polar M430 sport watch, compared with 2 research-grade instruments (ActiGraph and Actiheart), worn on 4 different locations using 1- and 3-axis accelerometers. METHODS:A total of 50 participants wore 2 ActiGraphs (wrist and hip), 2 Actihearts (upper and lower chest position), and 1 Polar M430 sport watch for 1 full day. We compared reported time (minutes) spent in sedentary behavior and in light, moderate, vigorous, and moderate to vigorous PA, step counts, activity energy expenditure, and total energy expenditure between devices. We used Pearson correlations, intraclass correlations, mean absolute percentage errors (MAPEs), and Bland-Altman plots to assess criterion validity. RESULTS:Pearson correlations between the Polar M430 and all research-grade instruments were moderate or stronger for vigorous PA (r range .59-.76), moderate to vigorous PA (r range .51-.75), steps (r range .85-.87), total energy expenditure (r range .88-.94), and activity energy expenditure (r range .74-.79). Bland-Altman plots showed higher agreement for higher intensities of PA. MAPE was high for most outcomes. Only total energy expenditure measured by the hip-worn ActiGraph and both Actiheart positions had acceptable or close to acceptable errors with MAPEs of 6.94% (ActiGraph, 3 axes), 8.26% (ActiGraph, 1 axis), 14.54% (Actiheart, upper position), and 14.37% (Actiheart, lower position). The wrist-worn ActiGraph had a MAPE of 15.94% for measuring steps. All other outcomes had a MAPE of 22% or higher. For most outcomes, the Polar M430 was most strongly correlated with the hip-worn triaxial ActiGraph, with a moderate or strong Pearson correlation for sedentary behavior (r=.52) and for light (r=.7), moderate (r=.57), vigorous (r=.76), and moderate to vigorous (r=.75) PA. In addition, correlations were strong or very strong for activity energy expenditure (r=.75), steps (r=.85), and total energy expenditure (r=.91). CONCLUSIONS:The Polar M430 can potentially be used as an addition to established research-grade instruments to collect some PA variables over a prolonged period. However, due to the high MAPE of most outcomes, only total energy expenditure can be trusted to provide close to valid results. Depending on the variable, the Polar M430 over- or underreported most metrics, and may therefore be better suited to report changes in PA over time for some outcomes, rather than as an accurate instrument for PA status in a population.

Dataset Information

Validation of the Polar V800 heart rate monitor and comparison of artifact correction methods among adults with hypertension.

Publications

Validation of the Polar V800 heart rate monitor and comparison of artifact correction methods among adults with hypertension.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets