Key result
The Empatica E4 wristband demonstrated similar signal quality to a standard holter monitor 85% of the time, while the holter performed better 5% of the time.
Why the study?
Does the Empatica E4 portable photoplethysmogram device provide comparable signal quality to a standard Holter monitor in healthy volunteers?
Population
Healthy volunteers
Comparison
Empatica E4 portable photoplethysmogram device vs General Electric's SEER Light Extend Recorder…
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
Does not support replacing Holter monitoring; leaves open validation of wearables for arrhythmia detection in clinical populations.
Observational
Does the Empatica E4 portable photoplethysmogram device provide comparable signal quality to a standard Holter monitor in healthy volunteers?
The Empatica E4 wristband showed similar signal quality to a standard Holter monitor 85% of the time in healthy volunteers, supporting its potential for further research in detecting atrial fibrillation.
McCarthy et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Healthy volunteers. Empatica E4 wristband vs. General Electric SEER Light Extend Recorder holter was evaluated on Qualitative signal quality. The Empatica E4 wristband demonstrated similar signal quality to a standard holter monitor 85% of the time, while the holter performed better 5% of the time.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: