gms | German Medical Science

7th EFSMA – European Congress of Sports Medicine, 3rd Central European Congress of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Annual Assembly of the German and the Austrian Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Austrian Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

26.-29.10.2011, Salzburg, Österreich

Reliability of GOW heart rate monitor for heart rate variability measurement on exercise

Meeting Abstract

  • corresponding author presenting/speaker Rafael Alis - Weartech; Catholic University Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  • author presenting/speaker Marco Romagnoli - Weartech; Catholic University Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  • author presenting/speaker Javier Villar - Catholic University Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  • Rafael Aranda - Department of Physiology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  • author presenting/speaker Javier Basterra - Catholic University Valencia (Valencia, Spain),, Valencia, Spain
  • Sergio Guillen - ITACA-TSB (Valencia, Spain), Valencia, Spain

7th EFSMA – European Congress of Sports Medicine, 3rd Central European Congress of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Salzburg, 26.-29.10.2011. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2011. Doc11esm147

DOI: 10.3205/11esm147, URN: urn:nbn:de:0183-11esm1477

Veröffentlicht: 24. Oktober 2011

© 2011 Alis et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open Access-Artikel und steht unter den Creative Commons Lizenzbedingungen (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.de). Er darf vervielfältigt, verbreitet und öffentlich zugänglich gemacht werden, vorausgesetzt dass Autor und Quelle genannt werden.


Gliederung

Text

Objective: In this study we try to compare HRV data from a smart textile system for recording heart rate variability (GOW) (Weartech s.l; Spain) and an electrocardiogram machine (Cardiolab II plus) (Prucka engineering, TX, USA) commonly used in hospitals, during a continuous cycling test.

Material/Methods: 6 cardiology patients performed a cycling test at stable intensity, heart rate variability data was recorded by the two systems during the test. 3’ RR segments were taken to compare time intervals between beats and HRV variables, using Bland-Altman analysis and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results: Limits of agreement (LoA) were stable on RR intervals around 4 ms (Widdest LoA: -7.979 to 7.457; Tigthest LoA: -4.351 to 3.553; Medium LoA, -4.39 to 4.90). HRV variables present ICC to ensure interchangeability of the methods in 5 of 7 variables. However RMSSD, HF and SD1 have large LoA.

Conclusion: Time intervals between heartbeats recorded by two metods were similars, LoA was about the difference on sampling times (1 ms for ECG and 4 ms for GOW). Correlation on HRV variables between the two methods is good as well as agreement. Except for RMSSD, HF and SD1, related to short-term variability, and sensitive to different sampling times. We conclude that both systems have excellent agreement in the register of RR intervals, but they are not so great for HRV variables related to the short time.