Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable Technology
Introduction: As wearable technology becomes increasingly popular and sophisticated, independent validation is needed to determine its accuracy and potential applications. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy (validity) of VO2max estimates and blood oxygen saturation mea...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Sensors |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/25/1/275 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841548917026586624 |
|---|---|
| author | Bryson Carrier Sofia Marten Chaves James W. Navalta |
| author_facet | Bryson Carrier Sofia Marten Chaves James W. Navalta |
| author_sort | Bryson Carrier |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction: As wearable technology becomes increasingly popular and sophisticated, independent validation is needed to determine its accuracy and potential applications. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy (validity) of VO2max estimates and blood oxygen saturation measured via pulse oximetry using the Garmin fēnix 6 with a general population participant pool. Methods: We recruited apparently healthy individuals (both active and sedentary) for VO2max (n = 19) and pulse oximetry testing (n = 22). VO2max was assessed through a graded exercise test and an outdoor run, comparing results from the Garmin fēnix 6 to a criterion measurement obtained from a metabolic system. Pulse oximetry involved comparing fēnix 6 readings under normoxic and hypoxic conditions against a medical-grade pulse oximeter. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, error analysis, correlation analysis, equivalence testing, and bias assessment, with the validation criteria set at a concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) > 0.7 and a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) < 10%. Results: The Garmin fēnix 6 provided accurate VO2max estimates, closely aligning with the 15 s and 30 s averaged laboratory data (MAPE for 30 s avg = 7.05%; Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient for 30 s avg = 0.73). However, it failed to accurately measure blood oxygen saturation (BOS) under any condition or combined analysis (MAPE for combined conditions BOS = 4.29%; Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient for combined conditions BOS = 0.10). Conclusion: While the Garmin fēnix 6 shows promise for estimating the VO2max, reflecting its utility for both individuals and researchers, it falls short in accurately measuring BOS, limiting its application for monitoring acclimatization and managing pulmonary diseases. This research underscores the importance of validating wearable technology to leverage its full potential in enhancing personal health and advancing public health research. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-4ef2256438c946ebbcefa672f39a5acb |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1424-8220 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Sensors |
| spelling | doaj-art-4ef2256438c946ebbcefa672f39a5acb2025-01-10T13:21:26ZengMDPI AGSensors1424-82202025-01-0125127510.3390/s25010275Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable TechnologyBryson Carrier0Sofia Marten Chaves1James W. Navalta2School of Integrated Health Sciences, Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USASchool of Integrated Health Sciences, Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USASchool of Integrated Health Sciences, Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USAIntroduction: As wearable technology becomes increasingly popular and sophisticated, independent validation is needed to determine its accuracy and potential applications. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy (validity) of VO2max estimates and blood oxygen saturation measured via pulse oximetry using the Garmin fēnix 6 with a general population participant pool. Methods: We recruited apparently healthy individuals (both active and sedentary) for VO2max (n = 19) and pulse oximetry testing (n = 22). VO2max was assessed through a graded exercise test and an outdoor run, comparing results from the Garmin fēnix 6 to a criterion measurement obtained from a metabolic system. Pulse oximetry involved comparing fēnix 6 readings under normoxic and hypoxic conditions against a medical-grade pulse oximeter. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, error analysis, correlation analysis, equivalence testing, and bias assessment, with the validation criteria set at a concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) > 0.7 and a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) < 10%. Results: The Garmin fēnix 6 provided accurate VO2max estimates, closely aligning with the 15 s and 30 s averaged laboratory data (MAPE for 30 s avg = 7.05%; Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient for 30 s avg = 0.73). However, it failed to accurately measure blood oxygen saturation (BOS) under any condition or combined analysis (MAPE for combined conditions BOS = 4.29%; Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient for combined conditions BOS = 0.10). Conclusion: While the Garmin fēnix 6 shows promise for estimating the VO2max, reflecting its utility for both individuals and researchers, it falls short in accurately measuring BOS, limiting its application for monitoring acclimatization and managing pulmonary diseases. This research underscores the importance of validating wearable technology to leverage its full potential in enhancing personal health and advancing public health research.https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/25/1/275cardiorespiratory fitnessfitness trackeractivity monitorbiometric technologyaltitudehypoxia |
| spellingShingle | Bryson Carrier Sofia Marten Chaves James W. Navalta Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable Technology Sensors cardiorespiratory fitness fitness tracker activity monitor biometric technology altitude hypoxia |
| title | Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable Technology |
| title_full | Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable Technology |
| title_fullStr | Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable Technology |
| title_full_unstemmed | Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable Technology |
| title_short | Validation of Aerobic Capacity (VO2max) and Pulse Oximetry in Wearable Technology |
| title_sort | validation of aerobic capacity vo2max and pulse oximetry in wearable technology |
| topic | cardiorespiratory fitness fitness tracker activity monitor biometric technology altitude hypoxia |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/25/1/275 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT brysoncarrier validationofaerobiccapacityvo2maxandpulseoximetryinwearabletechnology AT sofiamartenchaves validationofaerobiccapacityvo2maxandpulseoximetryinwearabletechnology AT jameswnavalta validationofaerobiccapacityvo2maxandpulseoximetryinwearabletechnology |