Key result
A wearable sensor showed a mean absolute percentage error of 6.08% and a Pearson coefficient of 0.61 when compared to an arm cuff blood pressure meter during exercise protocols.
Why the study?
PPG technology accuracy in monitoring heart rate and blood pressure during physical activity is poorer than at rest, limiting its clinical application.
Does a wearable sensor accurately measure heart rate and blood pressure compared to an arm cuff blood pressure meter in healthy volunteers during exercise?
Observational (n=5)
Does a wearable sensor accurately measure heart rate and blood pressure compared to an arm cuff blood pressure meter in healthy volunteers during exercise?
Effect estimate: Pearson coefficient 0.61
A wearable PPG sensor demonstrated moderate correlation and a 6.08% mean absolute percentage error compared to a standard arm cuff for measuring vital signs during exercise.
Heart rate and blood pressure monitoring during physical activity and exercise allow early diagnosis of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and obesity. Plethysmography(PPG) has become popular worldwide for personal health monitoring systems. However, the accuracy of this technology in monitoring heart rate and blood pressure during activity is poorer than at rest. It limits their application. In this study, the performance of the wearable sensor and arm cuff blood pressure meter in measuring heart rate and blood pressure on the left arm is compared. Five healthy volunteers conducted the same exercise protocols, i.e., at rest, jump rope, treadmill walking, running (long run) and sprinting (short-run). The wearable sensor shows a mean absolute percentage error in 6.08% and Pearson coefficient in 0.61. Besides, the lowest range of 95% limit of agreement for diastolic blood pressure during treadmill run was found at 30.50.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cheng et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Healthy (n=5). Wearable sensor vs. Cuff arm blood pressure meter was evaluated on Heart rate and blood pressure measurement performance (Pearson coefficient 0.61). A wearable sensor showed a mean absolute percentage error of 6.08% and a Pearson coefficient of 0.61 when compared to an arm cuff blood pressure meter during exercise protocols.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: