Methodological Shortcomings of Wrist-Worn Heart Rate Monitors Validations

Wearable sensor technology could have an important role for clinical research and in delivering health care. Accordingly, such technology should undergo rigorous evaluation prior to market launch, and its performance should be supported by evidence-based marketing claims. Many studies have been published attempting to validate wrist-worn photoplethysmography (PPG)-based heart rate monitoring devices, but their contrasting results question the utility of this technology. The reason why many validations did not provide conclusive evidence of the validity of wrist-worn PPG-based heart rate monitoring devices is mostly methodological. The validation strategy should consider the nature of data provided by both the investigational and reference devices. There should be uniformity in the statistical approach to the analyses employed in these validation studies. The investigators should test the technology in the population of interest and in a setting appropriate for intended use. Device industries and the scientific community require robust standards for the validation of new wearable sensor technology.

[1]  Paul Quinn The EU commission's risky choice for a non-risk based strategy on assessment of medical devices , 2017, Comput. Law Secur. Rev..

[2]  Billy Sperlich,et al.  Wearable, yes, but able…?: it is time for evidence-based marketing claims! , 2016, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[3]  Dean F Sittig,et al.  Accuracy of Heart Rate Monitoring by Some Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers , 2017, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[4]  Zohn Rosen,et al.  Validation of photoplethysmography as a method to detect heart rate during rest and exercise , 2015, Journal of medical engineering & technology.

[5]  Adrian Tarniceriu,et al.  Evaluation of accuracy and reliability of PulseOn optical heart rate monitoring device , 2015, 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).

[6]  Giulio Valenti,et al.  Optical heart rate monitoring module validation study , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE).

[7]  Hoda Javadikasgari,et al.  Variable Accuracy of Wearable Heart Rate Monitors during Aerobic Exercise , 2017, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[8]  L. Lin,et al.  A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. , 1989, Biometrics.

[9]  D. Lakens Equivalence Tests , 2017, Social psychological and personality science.

[10]  Dermot Phelan,et al.  Accuracy of Wrist-Worn Heart Rate Monitors , 2017, JAMA cardiology.

[11]  W G Hopkins,et al.  Measures of Reliability in Sports Medicine and Science , 2000, Sports medicine.

[12]  T. Hastie,et al.  Accuracy in Wrist-Worn, Sensor-Based Measurements of Heart Rate and Energy Expenditure in a Diverse Cohort , 2016, bioRxiv.

[13]  U. Wisløff,et al.  Accuracy of Heart Rate Watches: Implications for Weight Management , 2016, PloS one.

[14]  J. Vagedes,et al.  How accurate is pulse rate variability as an estimate of heart rate variability? A review on studies comparing photoplethysmographic technology with an electrocardiogram. , 2013, International journal of cardiology.

[15]  Michael Lang,et al.  Beyond Fitbit: A Critical Appraisal of Optical Heart Rate Monitoring Wearables and Apps, Their Current Limitations and Legal Implications , 2017 .

[16]  Jakub Parák,et al.  Evaluation of wearable consumer heart rate monitors based on photopletysmography , 2014, 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[17]  David M Maslove,et al.  Accuracy of a Wrist-Worn Wearable Device for Monitoring Heart Rates in Hospital Inpatients: A Prospective Observational Study , 2016, Journal of medical Internet research.