Next Article in Journal
A Mobile Device for Monitoring the Biological Purity of Air and Liquid Samples
Next Article in Special Issue
Analysis of Gender Differences in HRV of Patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Using Mobile-Health Technology
Previous Article in Journal
An SPRi Biosensor for Determination of the Ovarian Cancer Marker HE4 in Human Plasma
Previous Article in Special Issue
Wearable Devices Suitable for Monitoring Twenty Four Hour Heart Rate Variability in Military Populations
 
 
Correction published on 18 April 2022, see Sensors 2022, 22(8), 3090.
Article

Wrist-Based Photoplethysmography Assessment of Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability: Validation of WHOOP

1
Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA), Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide 5000, Australia
2
South Australian Sports Institute, Adelaide 5000, Australia
3
The Appleton Institute for Behavioural Science, Central Queensland University, Adelaide 5043, Australia
4
School of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane 4014, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Marco Altini
Sensors 2021, 21(10), 3571; https://doi.org/10.3390/s21103571
Received: 9 April 2021 / Revised: 10 May 2021 / Accepted: 14 May 2021 / Published: 20 May 2021 / Corrected: 18 April 2022
Heart rate (HR) and HR variability (HRV) infer readiness to perform exercise in athletic populations. Technological advancements have facilitated HR and HRV quantification via photoplethysmography (PPG). This study evaluated the validity of WHOOP’s PPG-derived HR and HRV against electrocardiogram-derived (ECG) measures. HR and HRV were assessed via WHOOP 2.0 and ECG over 15 opportunities during October–December 2018. WHOOP-derived pulse-to-pulse (PP) intervals were edited with WHOOP’s proprietary filter, in addition to various filter strengths via Kubios HRV software. HR and HRV (Ln RMSSD) were quantified for each filter strength. Agreement was assessed via bias and limits of agreement (LOA), and contextualised using smallest worthwhile change (SWC) and coefficient of variation (CV). Regardless of filter strength, bias (≤0.39 ± 0.38%) and LOA (≤1.56%) in HR were lower than the CV (10–11%) and SWC (5–5.5%) for this parameter. For Ln RMSSD, bias (1.66 ± 1.80%) and LOA (±5.93%) were lowest for a 200 ms filter and WHOOP’s proprietary filter, which approached or exceeded the CV (3–13%) and SWC (1.5–6.5%) for this parameter. Acceptable agreement was found between WHOOP- and ECG-derived HR. Bias and LOA in Ln RMSSD approached or exceeded the SWC/CV for this variable and should be interpreted against its own level of bias precision. View Full-Text
Keywords: autonomic nervous system; agreement; electrocardiogram autonomic nervous system; agreement; electrocardiogram
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Bellenger, C.R.; Miller, D.J.; Halson, S.L.; Roach, G.D.; Sargent, C. Wrist-Based Photoplethysmography Assessment of Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability: Validation of WHOOP. Sensors 2021, 21, 3571. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21103571

AMA Style

Bellenger CR, Miller DJ, Halson SL, Roach GD, Sargent C. Wrist-Based Photoplethysmography Assessment of Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability: Validation of WHOOP. Sensors. 2021; 21(10):3571. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21103571

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bellenger, Clint R., Dean J. Miller, Shona L. Halson, Gregory D. Roach, and Charli Sargent. 2021. "Wrist-Based Photoplethysmography Assessment of Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability: Validation of WHOOP" Sensors 21, no. 10: 3571. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21103571

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