Key result
Biofeedback device shows strong agreement with gold-standard ECG for measuring pre-exercise HRV.
Why the study?
Biofeedback devices are widely applied only for clinical purposes, leaving it unclear whether they could be used to estimate HRV in healthy populations.
Does a biofeedback device accurately estimate heart rate variability compared to ECG in healthy individuals undergoing a maximal exercise protocol?
Cross-Sectional (n=60)
No
Does a biofeedback device accurately estimate heart rate variability compared to ECG in healthy individuals undergoing a maximal exercise protocol?
Biofeedback devices can be used as a swift method to examine heart rate variability among healthy individuals, especially in resting conditions, showing significant correlation with standard ECG.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support biofeedback devices for resting HRV assessment in healthy adults; leaves open validation in clinical populations and post-exercise settings.
Although the use of biofeedback devices is beyond measure, they are widely applied only for clinical purposes. Therefore, this study evaluated whether biofeedback devices could be applied to estimate heart rate variability (HRV) among healthy populations. 60 individuals (46 ± 5 years; 30 women) performed maximal exercise protocol (MEP). At pre- and post-MEP status, HRV indexes were collected by two devices: 1) the electrocardiogram device (ECG); 2) the biofeedback device (BIO). At pre-exercise status, all HRV parameters had significant correlations, ranging from low (r = 0.241) to high (r = 0.779). At post-exercise status, significant correlations for some of the HRV measures were found as well, ranging from low (i.e., r ≤ 0.29) to moderate (i.e., 0.3 ≤ r ≤ 0.49). According to our knowledge, this study is the first attempt to evaluate HRV by biofeedback devices among healthy individuals, which shows they can also be applied as a swift method to examine HRV among healthy individuals, especially in rest conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pouriamehr et al. (2024) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy individuals (n=60). Biofeedback device (BIO) vs. Electrocardiogram (ECG) was evaluated on Intra-class correlation (ICC) of SDNN at pre-exercise status (ICC 0.874, 95% CI 0.779-0.928, p=<0.001). The biofeedback device demonstrated significant agreement with the gold-standard electrocardiogram for measuring heart rate variability parameters such as SDNN (ICC 0.874) at pre-exercise status.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: