Next Article in Journal
Silver Nanoplates for Colorimetric Determination of Xanthine in Human Plasma and in Fish Meat via Etching/Aggregation/Fusion Steps
Next Article in Special Issue
How to Use Heart Rate Variability: Quantification of Vagal Activity in Toddlers and Adults in Long-Term ECG
Previous Article in Journal
Self-Adherent Biodegradable Gelatin-Based Hydrogel Electrodes for Electrocardiography Monitoring
Previous Article in Special Issue
Fabrication of Parylene-Coated Microneedle Array Electrode for Wearable ECG Device
 
 
Article

Validity of Smartphone Heart Rate Variability Pre- and Post-Resistance Exercise

1
Program in Physical Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA
2
Department of Kinesiology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2020, 20(20), 5738; https://doi.org/10.3390/s20205738
Received: 23 September 2020 / Revised: 2 October 2020 / Accepted: 6 October 2020 / Published: 9 October 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue ECG Monitoring System)
The aim was to examine the validity of heart rate variability (HRV) measurements from photoplethysmography (PPG) via a smartphone application pre- and post-resistance exercise (RE) and to examine the intraday and interday reliability of the smartphone PPG method. Thirty-one adults underwent two simultaneous ultrashort-term electrocardiograph (ECG) and PPG measurements followed by 1-repetition maximum testing for back squats, bench presses, and bent-over rows. The participants then performed RE, where simultaneous ultrashort-term ECG and PPG measurements were taken: two pre- and one post-exercise. The natural logarithm of the root mean square of successive normal-to-normal (R-R) differences (LnRMSSD) values were compared with paired-sample t-tests, Pearson product correlations, Cohen’s d effect sizes (ESs), and Bland–Altman analysis. Intra-class correlations (ICC) were determined between PPG LnRMSSDs. Significant, small–moderate differences were found for all measurements between ECG and PPG: BasePre1 (ES = 0.42), BasePre2 (0.30), REPre1 (0.26), REPre2 (0.36), and REPost (1.14). The correlations ranged from moderate to very large: BasePre1 (r = 0.59), BasePre2 (r = 0.63), REPre1 (r = 0.63), REPre2 (r = 0.76), and REPost (r = 0.41)—all p < 0.05. The agreement for all the measurements was “moderate” (0.10–0.16). The PPG LnRMSSD exhibited “nearly-perfect” intraday reliability (ICC = 0.91) and “very large” interday reliability (0.88). The smartphone PPG was comparable to the ECG for measuring HRV at rest, but with larger error after resistance exercise. View Full-Text
Keywords: photoplethysmography; autonomic modulation; pulse rate variability; mobile devices; fatigue; recovery photoplethysmography; autonomic modulation; pulse rate variability; mobile devices; fatigue; recovery
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Holmes, C.J.; Fedewa, M.V.; Winchester, L.J.; MacDonald, H.V.; Wind, S.A.; Esco, M.R. Validity of Smartphone Heart Rate Variability Pre- and Post-Resistance Exercise. Sensors 2020, 20, 5738. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20205738

AMA Style

Holmes CJ, Fedewa MV, Winchester LJ, MacDonald HV, Wind SA, Esco MR. Validity of Smartphone Heart Rate Variability Pre- and Post-Resistance Exercise. Sensors. 2020; 20(20):5738. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20205738

Chicago/Turabian Style

Holmes, Clifton J., Michael V. Fedewa, Lee J. Winchester, Hayley V. MacDonald, Stefanie A. Wind, and Michael R. Esco. 2020. "Validity of Smartphone Heart Rate Variability Pre- and Post-Resistance Exercise" Sensors 20, no. 20: 5738. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20205738

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop