Abstract:BACKGROUND Heart rate variability (HRV) is used to assess cardiac health and autonomic nervous system capabilities. With the growing popularity of commercially available wearable technologies, the opportunity to unobtrusively measure HRV via photoplethysmography (PPG) is an attractive alternative to electrocardiogram (ECG), which serves as the gold standard. PPG measures blood flow within the vasculature using color intensity. However, PPG does not directly measure HRV; it measures pulse rate variability (PRV). Previous studies comparing consumer-grade PRV with HRV have demonstrated mixed results in short durations of activity under controlled conditions. Further research is required to determine the efficacy of PRV to estimate HRV under free-living conditions. OBJECTIVE This study aims to compare PRV estimates obtained from a consumer-grade PPG sensor with HRV measurements from a portable ECG during unsupervised free-living conditions, including sleep, and examine factors influencing estimation, including measurement conditions and simple editing methods to limit motion artifacts. METHODS A total of 10 healthy adults were recruited. Data from a Microsoft Band 2 and a Shimmer3 ECG unit were recorded simultaneously using a smartphone. Participants wore the devices for >90 min during typical day-to-day activities and while sleeping. After filtering, ECG data were processed using a combination of discrete wavelet transforms and peak-finding methods to identify R-R intervals. P-P intervals were edited for deletion using methods based on outlier detection and by removing sections affected by motion artifacts. Common HRV metrics were compared, including mean N-N, SD of N-N intervals, percentage of subsequent differences >50 ms (pNN50), root mean square of successive differences, low-frequency power (LF), and high-frequency power. Validity was assessed using root mean square error (RMSE) and Pearson correlation coefficient ( R 2 ). RESULTS Data sets for 10 days and 9 corresponding nights were acquired. The mean RMSE was 182 ms (SD 48) during the day and 158 ms (SD 67) at night. R 2 ranged from 0.00 to 0.66, with 2 of 19 (2 nights) trials considered moderate, 7 of 19 (2 days, 5 nights) fair, and 10 of 19 (8 days, 2 nights) poor. Deleting sections thought to be affected by motion artifacts had a minimal impact on the accuracy of PRV measures. Significant HRV and PRV differences were found for LF during the day and R-R, SDNN, pNN50, and LF at night. For 8 of the 9 matched day and night data sets, R 2 values were higher at night ( P= .08). P-P intervals were less sensitive to rapid R-R interval changes. CONCLUSIONS Owing to overall poor concurrent validity and inconsistency among participant data, PRV was found to be a poor surrogate for HRV under free-living conditions. These findings suggest that free-living HRV measurements would benefit from examining alternate sensing methods, such as multiwavelength PPG and wearable ECG.

A Statistical Comparison of Heart Rate Variability Measurements Between Devices: Chest Strap Versus Finger Probe.

Reliability of a Low-Cost Chest Strap to Estimate Short-Term and Ultra-Short-Term Heart Rate Variability Measures in Response to Emotionally Valenced Stimuli

Validity of the Polar H10 Sensor for Heart Rate Variability Analysis during Resting State and Incremental Exercise in Recreational Men and Women

Measuring Heart Rate Variability in Free-Living Conditions Using Consumer-Grade Photoplethysmography: Validation Study

Measuring Heart Rate Variability in Free-Living Conditions Using Consumer-Grade Photoplethysmography: Validation Study (Preprint)

Wrist-worn optical and chest strap heart rate comparison in a heterogeneous sample of healthy individuals and in coronary artery disease patients

The Validity of Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 for Serial Measurements of Heart Rate Variability and Resting Heart Rate

A comparison between heart rate and heart rate variability as indicators of cardiac health and fitness

Can Wearable Devices Accurately Measure Heart Rate Variability? A Systematic Review

Reproducibility of Heart Rate Variability Revealed by Repeated Measurements during and after Hemodialysis

Precision and reliability of the polar team pro computer software for analyzing heart rate variability

A Novel Smartphone App for the Measurement of Ultra–Short-Term and Short-Term Heart Rate Variability: Validity and Reliability Study

Comparative Analysis of the Equivital EQ02 Lifemonitor with Holter Ambulatory ECG Device for Continuous Measurement of ECG, Heart Rate, and Heart Rate Variability: A Validation Study for Precision and Accuracy

A Novel Smartphone App for the Measurement of Ultra–Short-Term and Short-Term Heart Rate Variability: Validity and Reliability Study (Preprint)

On the Variability of Heart Rate Variability—Evidence from Prospective Study of Healthy Young College Students

Validity of a Heart Rate Monitor for Heart Rate Variability Analysis During an Orthostatic Challenge

COMPARISON OF WEARABLES FOR SELF-MONITORING OF HEART RATE IN CORONARY REHABILITATION PATIENTS.

Analysis of time-domain indices, frequency domain measures of heart rate variability derived from ECG waveform and pulse-wave-related HRV among overweight individuals: an observational study

Assessment of Physiological Signals from Photoplethysmography Sensors Compared to an Electrocardiogram Sensor: A Validation Study in Daily Life

Novel heart rate variability index for wrist-worn wearable devices subject to motion artifacts that complicate measurement of the continuous pulse interval

Smartwatch-derived heart rate variability: a head-to-head comparison with the gold standard in cardiovascular disease