How accurate are the wrist-based heart rate monitors during walking and running activities? Are they accurate enough?

Насколько точны наручные мониторы частоты сердечных сокращений во время ходьбы и бега? Достаточно ли они точны?
Jung Min Lee, Danae Dinkel, Sarah E. Stahl, Hyun-Sung An, John M. Noble
2016-04-01

mean absolute percentage errorphotoplethysmographytreadmill walking and runningwearable activity trackerswrist-based heart rate monitors
BACKGROUND: Heart rate (HR) monitors are valuable devices for fitness-orientated individuals. There has been a vast influx of optical sensing blood flow monitors claiming to provide accurate HR during physical activities. These monitors are worn on the arm and wrist to detect HR with photoplethysmography (PPG) techniques. Little is known about the validity of these wearable activity trackers. AIM: Validate the Scosche Rhythm (SR), Mio Alpha (MA), Fitbit Charge HR (FH), Basis Peak (BP), Microsoft Band (MB), and TomTom Runner Cardio (TT) wireless HR monitors. METHODS: 50 volunteers (males: n=32, age 19-43 years; females: n=18, age 19-38 years) participated. All monitors were worn simultaneously in a randomised configuration. The Polar RS400 HR chest strap was the criterion measure. A treadmill protocol of one 30 min bout of continuous walking and running at 3.2, 4.8, 6.4, 8.0, and 9.6 km/h (5 min at each protocol speed) with HR manually recorded every minute was completed. RESULTS: For group comparisons, the mean absolute percentage error values were: 3.3%, 3.6%, 4.0%, 4.6%, 4.8% and 6.2% for TT, BP, RH, MA, MB and FH, respectively. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (r) was observed: r=0.959 (TT), r=0.956 (MB), r=0.954 (BP), r=0.933 (FH), r=0.930 (RH) and r=0.929 (MA). Results from 95% equivalency testing showed monitors were found to be equivalent to those of the criterion HR (±10% equivalence zone: 98.15-119.96). CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that the wearable activity trackers provide an accurate measurement of HR during walking and running activities.
1
95% equivalency testing found all monitors equivalent to the criterion heart rate within the predefined ±10% equivalence zone.
2
All monitors showed strong correlations with the criterion measure, with Pearson’s r ranging from 0.929 to 0.959.
3
Mean absolute percentage errors ranged from 3.3% for TomTom Runner Cardio to 6.2% for Fitbit Charge HR.
4
Six wrist- and arm-based optical heart-rate monitors were validated against a Polar RS400 chest strap in 50 volunteers during treadmill walking and running.
5
The tested wearable activity trackers provided accurate heart-rate measurements across treadmill speeds from 3.2 to 9.6 km/h.

Wrist- and arm-worn optical heart rate monitors during walking and running

Measurement accuracy and validity of heart rate readings compared with a chest-strap criterion

Publication Details
Publication Date
2016-04-01
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Access Type
Author Information
Authors
Jung Min Lee
Danae Dinkel
Sarah E. Stahl
Hyun-Sung An
John M. Noble
Explore further
Open the scid.ai AI chat with a ready-made request: it will find papers on a similar topic and help build a literature review.
Find similar papers in the chat
Make a presentation
100%