Key result
PPG wearables show poor agreement with ECG for measuring HRV during ambulatory movement.
Why the study?
Heart rate and heart rate variability are key measures in psychophysiological studies, but photoplethysmography-based wearables pose critical validity concerns.
Do PPG wearables accurately measure HR and HRV compared to criterion ECG in healthy participants across resting and ambulatory conditions?
Population
40 healthy participants
Comparison
Four PPG wearables vs criterion electrocardiography device (VU-AMS)
Design
Validation study
Authors
Loading...
PPG wearables warrant caution for HRV amid movement; leaves open their role for ambulatory HR monitoring.
Observational (n=40)
No
Do PPG wearables accurately measure HR and HRV compared to criterion ECG in healthy participants across resting and ambulatory conditions?
PPG-based wearables, including research-grade devices, have limited validity for measuring heart rate variability in non-resting conditions involving movement.
Sinichi et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Healthy participants (n=40). Four PPG wearables (Kyto2935, Schone Rhythm 24, HeartMath Inner Balance Bluetooth, Empatica EmbracePlus) vs. Criterion ECG device (VU-AMS) was evaluated on Agreement of HR and HRV measurements (signal quality, MAAPE, regression, Bland-Altman bias) between PPG devices and criterion ECG. Four PPG wearables, including a research-grade device, showed low agreement with criterion ECG for HRV measurement in ambulatory-like conditions involving movement, though they captured HR more accurately.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: