Key result
Q-Band smart wristband shows gender-dependent heart rate accuracy vs chest straps, reaching ~13% error in women.
Why the study?
Wearable devices are increasingly used in fitness routines and military settings, necessitating a rigorous assessment of the accuracy of locally manufactured wristbands compared to chest straps to inform device selection.
Does the Q-Band Q-69 smart wristband accurately measure heart rate compared to the Zephyr Bioharness chest strap in exercising individuals?
Observational
No
Does the Q-Band Q-69 smart wristband accurately measure heart rate compared to the Zephyr Bioharness chest strap in exercising individuals?
The Q-Band Q-69 smart wristband exhibits significant gender and activity-dependent variations in heart rate measurement accuracy, particularly during high-intensity activities like running.
Wristband HR readings may be less reliable in exercising women; leaves open need for validation before clinical or research use.
BACKGROUND The integration of wearable devices into fitness routines, particularly in military settings, necessitates a rigorous assessment of their accuracy. This study evaluates the precision of heart rate measurements by locally manufactured wristbands, increasingly used in military academies, to inform future device selection for military training activities. OBJECTIVE This research aims to assess the reliability of heart rate monitoring in chest straps versus wearable wristbands. METHODS Data on heart rate and acceleration were collected using the Q-Band Q-69 smart wristband (Mobile Action Technology Inc) and compared against the Zephyr Bioharness standard measuring device. The Lin concordance correlation coefficient, Pearson product moment correlation coefficient, and intraclass correlation coefficient were used for reliability analysis. RESULTS Participants from a Northern Taiwanese medical school were enrolled (January 1-June 31, 2021). The Q-Band Q-69 demonstrated that the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) of women was observed to be 13.35 (SD 13.47). Comparatively, men exhibited a lower MAPE of 8.54 (SD 10.49). The walking state MAPE was 7.79 for women and 10.65 for men. The wristband’s accuracy generally remained below 10% MAPE in other activities. Pearson product moment correlation coefficient analysis indicated gender-based performance differences, with overall coefficients of 0.625 for women and 0.808 for men, varying across walking, running, and cooldown phases. CONCLUSIONS This study highlights significant gender and activity-dependent variations in the accuracy of the MobileAction Q-Band Q-69 smart wristband. Reduced accuracy was notably observed during running. Occasional extreme errors point to the necessity of caution in relying on such devices for exercise monitoring. The findings emphasize the limitations and potential inaccuracies of wearable technology, especially in high-intensity physical activities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2023) reported an observational. Q-Band Q-69 smart wristband vs. Zephyr Bioharness standard measuring device was evaluated on Reliability and accuracy of heart rate monitoring (mean absolute percentage error and correlation coefficients). The Q-Band Q-69 smart wristband showed gender-dependent variations in heart rate accuracy compared to a chest strap, with a mean absolute percentage error of 13.35 in women and 8.54 in men.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: