Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation Study
Abstract BackgroundConsumer-oriented wearable devices (CWDs) such as smartphones and smartwatches have gained prominence for their ability to detect atrial fibrillation (AF) through proprietary algorithms using electrocardiography or photoplethysmography (PPG)–based digital re...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
JMIR Publications
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | JMIR Formative Research |
| Online Access: | https://formative.jmir.org/2025/1/e65139 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841526686977359872 |
|---|---|
| author | Femke Wouters Henri Gruwez Christophe Smeets Anessa Pijalovic Wouter Wilms Julie Vranken Zoë Pieters Hugo Van Herendael Dieter Nuyens Maximo Rivero-Ayerza Pieter Vandervoort Peter Haemers Laurent Pison |
| author_facet | Femke Wouters Henri Gruwez Christophe Smeets Anessa Pijalovic Wouter Wilms Julie Vranken Zoë Pieters Hugo Van Herendael Dieter Nuyens Maximo Rivero-Ayerza Pieter Vandervoort Peter Haemers Laurent Pison |
| author_sort | Femke Wouters |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Abstract
BackgroundConsumer-oriented wearable devices (CWDs) such as smartphones and smartwatches have gained prominence for their ability to detect atrial fibrillation (AF) through proprietary algorithms using electrocardiography or photoplethysmography (PPG)–based digital recordings. Despite numerous individual validation studies, a direct comparison of interdevice performance is lacking.
ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate and compare the ability of CWDs to distinguish between sinus rhythm and AF.
MethodsPatients exhibiting sinus rhythm or AF were enrolled through a cardiology outpatient clinic. The participants were instructed to perform heart rhythm measurements using a handheld 6-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) device (KardiaMobile 6L), a smartwatch-derived single-lead ECG (Apple Watch), and two PPG-based smartphone apps (FibriCheck and Preventicus) in a random sequence, with simultaneous 12-lead reference ECG as the gold standard.
ResultsA total of 122 participants were included in the study: median age 69 (IQR 61-77) years, 63.9% (n=78) men, 25% (n=30) with AF, 9.8% (n=12) without prior smartphone experience, and 73% (n=89) without experience in using a smartwatch. The sensitivity to detect AF was 100% for all devices. The specificity to detect sinus rhythm was 96.4% (95% CI 89.5%-98.8%) for KardiaMobile 6L, 97.8% (95% CI 91.6%‐99.5%) for Apple Watch, 98.9% (95% CI 92.5%‐99.8%) for FibriCheck, and 97.8% (95% CI 91.5%‐99.4%) for Preventicus (PP
ConclusionsIn this study population, the discrimination between sinus rhythm and AF using CWDs based on ECG or PPG was highly accurate, with no significant variations in performance across the examined devices. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-e730a741547d466996c188e3e7709141 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2561-326X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | JMIR Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | JMIR Formative Research |
| spelling | doaj-art-e730a741547d466996c188e3e77091412025-01-16T15:16:30ZengJMIR PublicationsJMIR Formative Research2561-326X2025-01-019e65139e6513910.2196/65139Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation StudyFemke Woutershttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-4420-6372Henri Gruwezhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-9169-265XChristophe Smeetshttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-1746-7585Anessa Pijalovichttp://orcid.org/0009-0005-0181-2814Wouter Wilmshttp://orcid.org/0009-0006-5047-7968Julie Vrankenhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-2691-0569Zoë Pietershttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-7288-4461Hugo Van Herendaelhttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-9603-2370Dieter Nuyenshttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-9390-3273Maximo Rivero-Ayerzahttp://orcid.org/0009-0005-8947-0467Pieter Vandervoorthttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-7031-6500Peter Haemershttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-3024-1281Laurent Pisonhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-8518-3330 Abstract BackgroundConsumer-oriented wearable devices (CWDs) such as smartphones and smartwatches have gained prominence for their ability to detect atrial fibrillation (AF) through proprietary algorithms using electrocardiography or photoplethysmography (PPG)–based digital recordings. Despite numerous individual validation studies, a direct comparison of interdevice performance is lacking. ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate and compare the ability of CWDs to distinguish between sinus rhythm and AF. MethodsPatients exhibiting sinus rhythm or AF were enrolled through a cardiology outpatient clinic. The participants were instructed to perform heart rhythm measurements using a handheld 6-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) device (KardiaMobile 6L), a smartwatch-derived single-lead ECG (Apple Watch), and two PPG-based smartphone apps (FibriCheck and Preventicus) in a random sequence, with simultaneous 12-lead reference ECG as the gold standard. ResultsA total of 122 participants were included in the study: median age 69 (IQR 61-77) years, 63.9% (n=78) men, 25% (n=30) with AF, 9.8% (n=12) without prior smartphone experience, and 73% (n=89) without experience in using a smartwatch. The sensitivity to detect AF was 100% for all devices. The specificity to detect sinus rhythm was 96.4% (95% CI 89.5%-98.8%) for KardiaMobile 6L, 97.8% (95% CI 91.6%‐99.5%) for Apple Watch, 98.9% (95% CI 92.5%‐99.8%) for FibriCheck, and 97.8% (95% CI 91.5%‐99.4%) for Preventicus (PP ConclusionsIn this study population, the discrimination between sinus rhythm and AF using CWDs based on ECG or PPG was highly accurate, with no significant variations in performance across the examined devices.https://formative.jmir.org/2025/1/e65139 |
| spellingShingle | Femke Wouters Henri Gruwez Christophe Smeets Anessa Pijalovic Wouter Wilms Julie Vranken Zoë Pieters Hugo Van Herendael Dieter Nuyens Maximo Rivero-Ayerza Pieter Vandervoort Peter Haemers Laurent Pison Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation Study JMIR Formative Research |
| title | Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation Study |
| title_full | Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation Study |
| title_fullStr | Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation Study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation Study |
| title_short | Comparative Evaluation of Consumer Wearable Devices for Atrial Fibrillation Detection: Validation Study |
| title_sort | comparative evaluation of consumer wearable devices for atrial fibrillation detection validation study |
| url | https://formative.jmir.org/2025/1/e65139 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT femkewouters comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT henrigruwez comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT christophesmeets comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT anessapijalovic comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT wouterwilms comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT julievranken comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT zoepieters comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT hugovanherendael comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT dieternuyens comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT maximoriveroayerza comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT pietervandervoort comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT peterhaemers comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy AT laurentpison comparativeevaluationofconsumerwearabledevicesforatrialfibrillationdetectionvalidationstudy |