Key result
Cortrium and Ithlete wireless monitors closely match wired ECG, but Cortrium outperforms during motion.
Why the study?
Before new wireless, compact, and relatively inexpensive heart rate monitors can be used in scientific research and clinical practice, their feasibility, validity, and reproducibility characteristics must be investigated.
Do wireless heart rate monitors (Cortrium C3 and Ithlete PPG) provide valid and reproducible heart rate and heart rate variability measurements compared to a wired reference monitor in healthy adults?
Observational (n=64)
No
Do wireless heart rate monitors (Cortrium C3 and Ithlete PPG) provide valid and reproducible heart rate and heart rate variability measurements compared to a wired reference monitor in healthy adults?
Wireless heart rate monitors like the Cortrium C3 and Ithlete PPG are feasible and valid for heart rate variability monitoring under controlled conditions, though motion artifacts remain a challenge during physical activity.
May support wireless HRV monitoring in controlled settings; leaves open ambulatory validity and clinical translation.
Wired ambulatory monitoring of the electrocardiogram (ECG) is an established method used by researchers and clinicians. Recently, a new generation of wireless, compact, and relatively inexpensive heart rate monitors have become available. However, before these monitors can be used in scientific research and clinical practice, their feasibility, validity, and reproducibility characteristics have to be investigated. Therefore, we tested how two wireless heart rate monitors (i.e., the Ithlete photoplethysmography (PPG) finger sensor and the Cortrium C3 ECG monitor perform against an established wired reference method (the VU-AMS ambulatory ECG monitor). Monitors were tested on cross-instrument and test-retest reproducibility in a controlled laboratory setting, while feasibility was evaluated in protocolled ambulatory settings at home. We found that the Cortrium and the Ithlete monitors showed acceptable agreement with the VU-AMS reference in laboratory setting. In ambulatory settings, assessments were feasible with both wireless devices although more valid data were obtained with the Cortrium than with the Ithlete. We conclude that both monitors have their merits under controlled laboratory settings where motion artefacts are minimized and stationarity of the ECG signal is optimized by design. These findings are promising for long-term ambulatory ECG measurements, although more research is needed to test whether the wireless devices' feasibility, validity, and reproducibility characteristics also hold in unprotocolled daily life settings with natural variations in posture and activities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kunkels et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Healthy volunteers (n=64). Wireless heart rate monitors (Cortrium C3 ECG and Ithlete PPG) vs. VU-AMS ambulatory ECG monitor (wired reference) was evaluated on Cross-instrument validity and test-retest reproducibility of interbeat interval (IBI) and heart rate variability (ln RMSSD). Both the Cortrium and Ithlete wireless heart rate monitors demonstrated good to excellent agreement with a standard wired ECG reference under controlled laboratory conditions, though the Cortrium yielded more valid data during ambulatory and motion tasks.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: