Trial Outcomes & Findings for Accuracy of Commercially Available Heart Rate Monitors (NCT NCT02697214)

NCT ID: NCT02697214

Last Updated: 2019-02-11

Results Overview

The purpose of this study is to assess the accuracy of four popular, commercially available wrist-worn heart rate monitors compared to the current gold standard of a ECG using Lin's Concordance Correlation Coefficient.

Recruitment status

COMPLETED

Study phase

NA

Target enrollment

50 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

20 minutes

Results posted on

2019-02-11

Participant Flow

All 50 subjects wore 4 monitors each. i.e. EKG, H7 polar monitor, and 2 other randomly assigned heart rate monitors.

Unit of analysis: Heart Rate monitors

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure
Apple Watch
Participants wore Polar H7 chest monitor, standard ECG and Apple Watch and one other wrist monitor.
Fitbit Charge HR
Participants wore Polar H7 chest monitor, standard ECG and Fitbit Charge HR and one other wrist monitor.
Mio Fuse
Participants wore Polar H7 chest monitor, standard ECG and Mio Fuse and one other wrist monitor.
Basis Peak
Participants wore Polar H7 chest monitor and Basis Peak and one other wrist monitor.
Polar HR
All participants wore Polar HR chest monitor
Standard ECG
All participants wore standard ECG
Overall Study
STARTED
26 26
25 25
25 25
24 24
50 50
50 50
Overall Study
Heart Rate at 2mph
26 26
25 25
25 25
24 24
50 50
50 50
Overall Study
Heart Rate at 3mph
26 26
25 25
25 25
24 24
50 50
50 50
Overall Study
Heart Rate at 4mph
26 26
25 25
25 25
24 24
50 50
50 50
Overall Study
Heart Rate at 6mph
26 26
25 25
25 25
24 24
50 50
50 50
Overall Study
COMPLETED
26 26
25 25
25 25
24 24
50 50
50 50
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

Reasons for withdrawal

Withdrawal data not reported

Baseline Characteristics

As each participant was assigned to wear two wrist-worn heart rate monitors.

Baseline characteristics by cohort

Baseline characteristics by cohort
Measure
Apple Watch
n=26 Heart Rate Monitors
Apple Watch heart rate monitoring device. Apple Watch: Apple Watch heart rate monitoring device.
Fitbit Charge HR
n=25 Heart Rate Monitors
Fitbit Charge HR heart rate monitoring device. Fitbit Charge HR: Fitbit Charge HR heart rate monitoring device.
Mio Fuse
n=25 Heart Rate Monitors
Mio Fuse heart rate monitoring device. Mio Fuse: Mio Fuse heart rate monitoring device.
Basis Peak
n=24 Heart Rate Monitors
Basis Peak heart rate monitoring device. Basis Peak: Basis Peak heart rate monitoring device.
Total
n=100 Heart Rate Monitors
Total of all reporting groups
Age, Customized
<=18 years
0 participants
n=99 Participants
0 participants
n=107 Participants
0 participants
n=206 Participants
0 participants
n=7 Participants
0 participants
n=31 Participants
Age, Customized
Between 18 and 65 years
26 participants
n=99 Participants
25 participants
n=107 Participants
25 participants
n=206 Participants
24 participants
n=7 Participants
50 participants
n=31 Participants
Age, Customized
>=65 years
0 participants
n=99 Participants
0 participants
n=107 Participants
0 participants
n=206 Participants
0 participants
n=7 Participants
0 participants
n=31 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Female
19 participants
n=99 Participants
12 participants
n=107 Participants
14 participants
n=206 Participants
13 participants
n=7 Participants
29 participants
n=31 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Male
7 participants
n=99 Participants
13 participants
n=107 Participants
11 participants
n=206 Participants
11 participants
n=7 Participants
21 participants
n=31 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
26 participants
n=99 Participants • As each participant was assigned to wear two wrist-worn heart rate monitors.
25 participants
n=107 Participants • As each participant was assigned to wear two wrist-worn heart rate monitors.
25 participants
n=206 Participants • As each participant was assigned to wear two wrist-worn heart rate monitors.
24 participants
n=7 Participants • As each participant was assigned to wear two wrist-worn heart rate monitors.
50 participants
n=31 Participants • As each participant was assigned to wear two wrist-worn heart rate monitors.

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: 20 minutes

Population: All participants are represented in the analysis population.

The purpose of this study is to assess the accuracy of four popular, commercially available wrist-worn heart rate monitors compared to the current gold standard of a ECG using Lin's Concordance Correlation Coefficient.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Apple Watch
n=26 Heart Rate Monitors
Apple Watch heart rate monitoring device. Apple Watch: Apple Watch heart rate monitoring device.
Fitbit Charge HR
n=25 Heart Rate Monitors
Fitbit Charge HR heart rate monitoring device. Fitbit Charge HR: Fitbit Charge HR heart rate monitoring device.
Mio Fuse
n=25 Heart Rate Monitors
Mio Fuse heart rate monitoring device. Mio Fuse: Mio Fuse heart rate monitoring device.
Basis Peak
n=24 Heart Rate Monitors
Basis Peak heart rate monitoring device. Basis Peak: Basis Peak heart rate monitoring device.
Measuring the Accuracy of Commercial Heart Rate Monitors.
.91 Correlation Coefficient
Interval 0.884 to 0.929
.84 Correlation Coefficient
Interval 0.791 to 0.872
.91 Correlation Coefficient
Interval 0.882 to 0.929
.83 Correlation Coefficient
Interval 0.779 to 0.865

Adverse Events

Apple Watch

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Fitbit Charge HR

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Mio Fuse

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Basis Peak

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Serious adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Other adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Additional Information

Marc Gillinov, MD

The Cleveland Clinic

Phone: 216 445-8841

Results disclosure agreements

  • Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
  • Publication restrictions are in place