Lindsey B, Hanley C, Reider L, Snyder S, Zhou Y, Bell E, Shim J, Hahn JO, Vignos M, Bar-Kochba E. Accuracy of heart rate measured by military-grade wearable ECG monitor compared with reference and commercial monitors.
BMJ Mil Health 2023:e002541. [PMID:
38053265 DOI:
10.1136/military-2023-002541]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2023] [Accepted: 10/27/2023] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Physiological monitoring of soldiers can indicate combat readiness and performance. Despite demonstrated use of wearable devices for HR monitoring, commercial options lack desired military features. A newly developed OMNI monitor includes desired features such as long-range secure data transmission. This study investigated the accuracy of the OMNI to measure HR via accuracy of R-R interval duration relative to research-grade ECG and commercial products.
METHODS
54 healthy individuals (male/female=37/17, age=22.2±3.6 years, height=173.0±9.1 cm, weight=70.1±11.2 kg) completed a submaximal exercise test while wearing a reference ECG (Biopac) and a randomly assigned chest-based monitor (OMNI, Polar H10, Equivital EQ-02, Zephyr Bioharness 3). All participants also wore two wrist-based photoplethysmography (PPG) devices, Garmin fēnix 6 and Empatica E4. Bland-Altman analyses of agreement, concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and root-mean-squared error (RMSE) were used to determine accuracy of the OMNI and commercial devices relative to Biopac. Additionally, a linear mixed-effects model evaluated the effects of device and exercise intensity on agreement.
RESULTS
Chest-based devices showed superior agreement with Biopac for measuring R-R interval compared with wrist-based ones in terms of mean bias, CCC and RMSE, with OMNI demonstrating the best scores on all metrics. Linear mixed-effects model showed no significant main or interaction effects for the chest-based devices. However, significant effects were found for Garmin and Empatica devices (p<0.001) as well as the interaction effects between both Garmin and Empatica and exercise intensity (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Chest-based ECG devices are preferred to wrist-based PPG devices due to superior HR accuracy over a range of exercise intensities, with the OMNI device demonstrating equal, if not superior, performance to other commercial ECG monitors. Additionally, wrist-based PPG devices are significantly affected by exercise intensity as they underestimate HR at low intensities and overestimate HR at high intensities.
Collapse