Why the study?
Wearable-derived heart rate metrics could be useful in clinical settings, but the accuracy of a commercial smartwatch PPG sensor across changing levels of physical activity needed evaluation.
Does a commercial smartwatch PPG sensor accurately track heart rate compared to an ECG chest strap during varying levels of physical activity?
Does a commercial smartwatch PPG sensor accurately track heart rate compared to an ECG chest strap during varying levels of physical activity?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Smartwatch PPG sensors provide reliable heart rate monitoring during rest but have limited accuracy during dynamic activities with rapid heart rate fluctuations.
The widespread popularity of wearable devices has offered new avenues for continuous heart rate (HR) monitoring. A variety of other health related metrics including stress, sleep, and daily energy are being derived by heart rate and other sensors on the device. These or similar metrics could prove useful in critical care and other inpatient settings. This study evaluates the accuracy of a commercial smartwatch's photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor in tracking HR changes across various physical activities, comparing its performance to an electrocardiography (ECG)-based chest strap. Eighteen participants, aged 20 to 50, engaged in a series of tasks including rest, walking, and stair climbing, while HR data were collected via both devices. During rest, the smartwatch provided HR measurements within 5% of the chest strap values for a significant majority of readings (73.0% for the right wrist and 78.8% for the left). However, accuracy declined during physical activities, with the disparity becoming more pronounced during stair climbing (62.0% for the right wrist and 69.6% for the left). Excluding the initial 60 seconds of each activity from the analysis improved smartwatch accuracy, particularly during walking and the second rest period, as the smartwatches often failed to detect sharp changes in heart rate when the activity effort suddenly changed. This study highlights smartwatch reliability in static conditions and its limitations in accurately capturing rapid HR fluctuations during dynamic activities. These outcomes will impact their potential clinical utility in some cases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Flett et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: