BackgroundWrist-worn monitors claim to provide accurate measures of heart rate and energy expenditure. People wishing to lose weight use these devices to monitor energy balance, however the accuracy of these devices to measure such parameters has not been established.AimTo determine the accuracy of four wrist-worn devices (Apple Watch, Fitbit Charge HR, Samsung Gear S and Mio Alpha) to measure heart rate and energy expenditure at rest and during exercise.MethodsTwenty-two healthy volunteers (50% female; aged 24 ± 5.6 years) completed ~1-hr protocols involving supine and seated rest, walking and running on a treadmill and cycling on an ergometer. Data from the devices collected during the protocol were compared with reference methods: electrocardiography (heart rate) and indirect calorimetry (energy expenditure).ResultsNone of the devices performed significantly better overall, however heart rate was consistently more accurate than energy expenditure across all four devices. Correlations between the devices and reference methods were moderate to strong for heart rate (0.67–0.95 [0.35 to 0.98]) and weak to strong for energy expenditure (0.16–0.86 [-0.25 to 0.95]). All devices underestimated both outcomes compared to reference methods. The percentage error for heart rate was small across the devices (range: 1–9%) but greater for energy expenditure (9–43%). Similarly, limits of agreement were considerably narrower for heart rate (ranging from -27.3 to 13.1 bpm) than energy expenditure (ranging from -266.7 to 65.7 kcals) across devices.ConclusionThese devices accurately measure heart rate. However, estimates of energy expenditure are poor and would have implications for people using these devices for weight loss.

Low-volume HIIT (51 min/week) was as effective as high-volume HIIT (114 min/week) and MICT (150 min/week) in ameliorating MetS severity.

No abstract

No abstract