Key result
Apple Watch AccurBeat platform shows ~96% agreement with 12-lead ECG for QTc interval measurements.
Why the study?
Wearable technologies are promising for QT interval assessment, but the clinical accuracy of computerized algorithms for measuring QT and QTc intervals from smartwatch ECGs remains unclear.
Does smartwatch-recorded QT and QTc assessment using the AccurBeat platform provide comparable measurements to conventional 12-lead ECG manual annotation in healthy adults?
Observational (n=50)
No
Does smartwatch-recorded QT and QTc assessment using the AccurBeat platform provide comparable measurements to conventional 12-lead ECG manual annotation in healthy adults?
Effect estimate: Mean difference -10.5 (95% CI -71.43, 50.43)
Smartwatch-based QT and QTc interval measurements using the AccurBeat platform are comparable to manual annotations from a standard 12-lead ECG in healthy adults.
Supports wearable QTc monitoring in healthy adults; leaves open validation in patients before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND: Abnormal prolongation or shortening of the QT interval is associated with increased risk for ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. For continuous monitoring, widespread use, and prevention of cardiac events, advanced wearable technologies are emerging as promising surrogates for conventional 12‑lead electrocardiogram (ECG) QT interval assessment. Previous studies have shown a good agreement between QT and corrected QT (QTc) intervals measured on a smartwatch ECG and a 12-lead ECG, but the clinical accuracy of computerized algorithms for QT and QTc interval measurement from smartwatch ECGs is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The prospective observational study compared the smartwatch-recorded QT and QTc assessed using AccurKardia's AccurBeat platform with the conventional 12‑lead ECG annotated manually by a cardiologist. METHODS: ECGs were collected from healthy participants (without any known cardiovascular disease) aged >22 years. Two consecutive 30-second ECG readings followed by (within 15 minutes) a 10-second standard 12-lead ECG were recorded for each participant. Characteristics of the participants were compared by sex using a 2-sample t test and Wilcoxon rank sum test. Statistical comparisons of heart rate (HR), QT interval, and QTc interval between the platform and the 12-lead ECG, ECG lead I, and ECG lead II were done using the Wilcoxon sign rank test. Linear regression was used to predict QTc and QT intervals from the ECG based on the platform's QTc/QT intervals with adjustment for age, sex, and difference in HR measurement. The Bland-Altman method was used to check agreement between various QT and QTc interval measurements. RESULTS: A total of 50 participants (32 female, mean age 46 years, SD 1 year) were included in the study. The result of the regression model using the platform measurements to predict the 12-lead ECG measurements indicated that, in univariate analysis, QT/QTc intervals from the platform significantly predicted QT/QTc intervals from the 12-lead ECG, ECG lead I, and ECG lead II, and this remained significant after adjustment for sex, age, and change in HR. The Bland-Altman plot results found that 96% of the average QTc interval measurements between the platform and QTc intervals from the 12-lead ECG were within the 95% confidence limit of the average difference between the two measurements, with a mean difference of -10.5 (95% limits of agreement -71.43, 50.43). A total of 94% of the average QT interval measurements between the platform and the 12-lead ECG were within the 95% CI of the average difference between the two measurements, with a mean difference of -6.3 (95% limits of agreement -54.54, 41.94). CONCLUSIONS: QT and QTc intervals obtained by a smartwatch coupled with the platform's assessment were comparable to those from a 12-lead ECG. Accordingly, with further refinements, remote monitoring using this technology holds promise for the identification of QT interval prolongation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chokshi et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Healthy participants without known cardiovascular disease (n=50). Apple Watch with AccurBeat platform vs. 12-lead ECG with manual annotation was evaluated on Agreement between platform and 12-lead ECG QTc interval measurements (Mean difference -10.5, 95% CI -71.43, 50.43). The Apple Watch with the AccurBeat platform showed comparable QTc interval measurements to a 12-lead ECG, with 96% of measurements within the 95% confidence limit and a mean difference of -10.5 ms.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: