Key result
The HeartBeat smartphone algorithm failed to meet ESH-IP2 accuracy standards for blood pressure measurement, showing no significant correlation with manual measurements (r=0.04, P=0.53 for systolic).
Why the study?
To determine whether the HeartBeat smartphone algorithm calculates blood pressure as accurately as required by the ESH-IP2 validation protocol.
Does the HeartBeat smartphone algorithm accurately calculate blood pressure compared to standard manual measurement in a general adult population?
Population
62 study participants from a general adult population
Comparison
HeartBeat smartphone algorithm vs standard manual blood pressure measurement
Design
Validation study
Authors
Loading...
Alerts clinicians against using this unvalidated algorithm; leaves open need for improved photoplethysmography validation studies.
Observational (n=62)
Blinded observers
No
Does the HeartBeat smartphone algorithm accurately calculate blood pressure compared to standard manual measurement in a general adult population?
Effect estimate: r=0.04
p-value: p=0.53
The tested smartphone-based photoplethysmography algorithm was not sufficiently accurate for remote blood pressure monitoring in a general adult population.
Holyoke et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Hypertension (n=62). HeartBeat algorithm with MediBeat app and pulse oximeter vs. Manual aneroid sphygmomanometer with stethoscope was evaluated on Accuracy of blood pressure measurement according to ESH-IP2 standards (r=0.04, p=0.53). The HeartBeat smartphone algorithm failed to meet ESH-IP2 accuracy standards for blood pressure measurement, showing no significant correlation with manual measurements (r=0.04, P=0.53 for systolic).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: