Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.
Who will be affected?
Readers: No access to all 28 journals. We recommend accessing our articles via PubMed Central
Authors: No access to the submission form or your user account.
Reviewers: No access to your user account. Please download manuscripts you are reviewing for offline reading before Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 7:00 PM.
Editors: No access to your user account to assign reviewers or make decisions.
Copyeditors: No access to user account. Please download manuscripts you are copyediting before Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 7:00 PM.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Validity of Galaxy Watch for estimating heart rate during maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing
Allan Inoue Rodrigues;
João Paulo Ferreira Soares;
Felipe Antunes-Santos;
Alexandre Reis Pires Ferreira;
Alberto de Almeida Campos Gonçalves;
João Arthur Alcântara De Lima;
Marcelo Rodrigues dos Santos
ABSTRACT
Background:
Smartwatches have become popular for monitoring various health parameters, including heart rate (HR). In some smartwatches, the HR is estimated using photoplethysmography (PPG) sensors. There is limited literature demonstrating the validity of PPG-based HR monitoring smartwatches in estimating HR during maximal exercises.
Objective:
We aim to determine the validity of Galaxy Watch 6 (GW6) devices in estimating HR during a maximal ramp cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) conducted on a treadmill with fifty-five healthy participants.
Methods:
We selected a Polar H10 device as the golden standard and evaluated HR across five intensity zones: 50–60%, 60–70%, 70–80%, 80–90%, and 90–100% of the participant maximal HR (HRmax). HR data from the GW6 and Polar H10 were compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the typical error of measurement (TEM), and the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE).
Results:
The TEM% ranged from 2.9 to 4.2%. The MAPE, ranged from 1.9 to 3.7%. The smallest systematic difference was observed for the highest intensity zone (90-100% HRmax).
Conclusions:
The GW6 PPG-based technology demonstrated reasonable validity in monitoring HR during CPET tests.
Citation
Please cite as:
Rodrigues AI, Soares JPF, Antunes-Santos F, Ferreira ARP, Gonçalves AdAC, De Lima JAA, dos Santos MR
Heart Rate Estimation Using the Galaxy Watch During Maximal Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing: Cross-Sectional Validation Study