The accuracy of blood pressure measurement by a smartwatch and a portable health device

Helmond, Noud van; Freeman, Cecilia G.; Hahnen, Christina; Haldar, Nilanjan; Hamati, Jacquelyn N; Bard, Dylan M.; Murali, Vignesh; Merli, Geno J.; Joseph, Jeffrey I.

doi:10.1080/21548331.2019.1656991

Cited by 21 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Demographics and characteristics of the study population are displayed in Table 1. These data have previously been presented by Van Helmond et al [12] and are reproduced with permission. (15) Systolic blood pressure at baseline (mm Hg), mean (SD) (9) Diastolic blood pressure at baseline (mm Hg), mean (SD) (12) Heart rate at baseline (bpm), mean (SD)…”

Section: Principal Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…For BP measurement validation, the main outcome was the mean (SD) of the absolute difference between the respective investigational devices and the reference values for SBP and DBP [9,10]. The BP measurement results have been presented elsewhere previously [12] and are reported again with permission. BP measurements by the investigational devices were considered accurate if the mean absolute difference was ≤5 mm Hg with a SD of ≤8 mm Hg [9,10].…”

Section: Data and Statistical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accuracy of Vital Signs Measurements by a Smartwatch and a Portable Health Device: Validation Study

Hahnen¹,

Freeman²,

Haldar³

et al. 2020

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background New consumer health devices are being developed to easily monitor multiple physiological parameters on a regular basis. Many of these vital sign measurement devices have yet to be formally studied in a clinical setting but have already spread widely throughout the consumer market. Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy and precision of heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and oxygen saturation (SpO2) measurements of 2 novel all-in-one monitoring devices, the BodiMetrics Performance Monitor and the Everlast smartwatch. Methods We enrolled 127 patients (>18 years) from the Thomas Jefferson University Hospital Preadmission Testing Center. SBP and HR were measured by both investigational devices. In addition, the Everlast watch was utilized to measure DBP, and the BodiMetrics Performance Monitor was utilized to measure SpO2. After 5 min of quiet sitting, four hospital-grade standard and three investigational vital sign measurements were taken, with 60 seconds in between each measurement. The reference vital sign measurements were calculated by determining the average of the two standard measurements that bounded each investigational measurement. Using this method, we determined three comparison pairs for each investigational device in each subject. After excluding data from 42 individuals because of excessive variation in sequential standard measurements per prespecified dropping rules, data from 85 subjects were used for final analysis. Results Of 85 participants, 36 (42%) were women, and the mean age was 53 (SD 21) years. The accuracy guidelines were only met for the HR measurements in both devices. SBP measurements deviated 16.9 (SD 13.5) mm Hg and 5.3 (SD 4.7) mm Hg from the reference values for the Everlast and BodiMetrics devices, respectively. The mean absolute difference in DBP measurements for the Everlast smartwatch was 8.3 (SD 6.1) mm Hg. The mean absolute difference between BodiMetrics and reference SpO2 measurements was 3.02%. Conclusions Both devices we investigated met accuracy guidelines for HR measurements, but they failed to meet the predefined accuracy guidelines for other vital sign measurements. Continued sale of consumer physiological monitors without prior validation and approval procedures is a public health concern.

show abstract

Section: Principal Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Data and Statistical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Vital Signs Measurements by a Smartwatch and a Portable Health Device: Validation Study

Hahnen¹,

Freeman²,

Haldar³

et al. 2020

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, mercury-based devices have limitations due to environmental contamination and observer bias in measurement. To address these limitations, wearable and portable digital devices that could monitor blood pressure were introduced and used by health care professionals and patients 3 , 4 . Multiple guidelines are available to appropriately use digital devices for self-monitoring blood pressure by patients at their convenience and in health facilities 5 , 6 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic accuracy of mercurial versus digital blood pressure measurement devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Muniyandi

Sellappan

Chellaswamy

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to systematically review the diagnostic accuracy of a digital blood pressure measurement device compared to the gold standard mercury sphygmomanometer in published studies. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCO, EMBASE and Google Scholar host databases using the specific search strategy and filters from 1st January 2000 to 3rd April 2021. We included studies reporting data on the sensitivity or specificity of blood pressure measured by digital devices and mercury sphygmomanometer used as the reference standard. Studies conducted among children, special populations, and specific disease groups were excluded. We considered published manuscripts in the English language only. The risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed based on the author’s judgment using the QUADAS2 manual measurement evaluation tool. Based on the screening, four studies were included in the final analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and 95% confidence interval were estimated. The digital blood pressure monitoring has a moderate level of accuracy and the device can correctly distinguish hypertension with a pooled estimate sensitivity of 65.7% and specificity of 95.9%. After removing one study, which had very low sensitivity and very high specificity, the pooled sensitivity estimate was 79%, and the specificity was 91%. The meta-analysis of DOR suggests that the digital blood pressure monitor had moderate accuracy with a mercury sphygmomanometer. This will provide the clinician and patients with accurate information on blood pressure with which diagnostic and treatment decisions could be made.

show abstract

“…Several of such watches are in existence and are capable of measuring heart rate, blood pressure, and oxygen saturation. Currently, however, it would seem that only heart rate meets accuracy guidelines, but not the other vital sign measurements [22,23].…”

Section: Orthostatic Hypotensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital health technology for non-motor symptoms in people with Parkinson's disease: Futile or future?

Wamelen

Sringean

Trivedi

et al. 2021

Parkinsonism & Related Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an ongoing digital revolution in the field of Parkinson's disease (PD) for the objective measurement of motor aspects, to be used in clinical trials and possibly support therapeutic choices. The focus of remote technologies is now also slowly shifting towards the broad but more "hidden" spectrum of non-motor symptoms (NMS). Methods: A narrative review of digital health technologies for measuring NMS in people with PD was conducted. These digital technologies were defined as assessment tools for NMS offered remotely in the form of a wearable, downloadable as a mobile app, or any other objective measurement of NMS in PD that did not require a hospital visit and could be performed remotely. Searches were performed using peer-reviewed literature indexed databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials), as well as Google and Google Scholar. Results: Eighteen studies deploying digital health technology in PD were identified, for example for the measurement of sleep disorders, cognitive dysfunction and orthostatic hypotension. In addition, we describe promising developments in other conditions that could be translated for use in PD. Conclusion: Unlike motor symptoms, non-motor features of PD are difficult to measure directly using remote digital technologies. Nonetheless, it is currently possible to reliably measure several NMS and further digital technology developments are underway to offer further capture of often under-reported and under-recognised NMS.

show abstract

The accuracy of blood pressure measurement by a smartwatch and a portable health device

Cited by 21 publications

References 5 publications

Accuracy of Vital Signs Measurements by a Smartwatch and a Portable Health Device: Validation Study

Accuracy of Vital Signs Measurements by a Smartwatch and a Portable Health Device: Validation Study

Diagnostic accuracy of mercurial versus digital blood pressure measurement devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Digital health technology for non-motor symptoms in people with Parkinson's disease: Futile or future?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About