Wearable technology for cardiology: An update and framework for the future

Pevnick, Joshua M; Birkeland, Kade; Zimmer, Raymond; Elad, Y.; Kedan, Ilan

doi:10.1016/j.tcm.2017.08.003

Cited by 136 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, wearable technology is suitable for conducting and evaluating results of digital health interventions. Being highly unobtrusive and providing a continuous and passive measurement of multiple signals, wearable devices are increasingly used in long‐term recording of sleep (de Zambotti, Cellini, Goldstone, Colrain, & Baker, ), cardiovascular (Pevnick, Birkeland, Zimmer, Elad, & Kedan, ), and physical activity data (Lobelo et al, ). Finally, wearable devices may be used to generalize laboratory outcomes to real‐life settings (Wilhelm & Grossman, ) since, as in the case of cardiovascular reactivity (e.g., Zanstra & Johnston, ), responses to laboratory stimuli may be only weakly associated to physiological reactivity in the natural environment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stressing the accuracy: Wrist‐worn wearable sensor validation over different conditions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wearable sensors are promising instruments for conducting both laboratory and ambulatory research in psychophysiology. However, scholars should be aware of their measurement error and the conditions in which accuracy is achieved. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of a wearable sensor designed for research purposes, the E4 wristband (Empatica, Milan, Italy), in measuring heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV), and skin conductance (SC) over five laboratory conditions widely used in stress reactivity research (seated rest, paced breathing, orthostatic, Stroop, speech task) and two ecological conditions (slow walking, keyboard typing). Forty healthy participants concurrently wore the wristband and two gold standard measurement systems (i.e., electrocardiography and finger SC sensor). The wristband accuracy was determined by evaluating the signal quality and the correlations with and the Bland‐Altman plots against gold standard‐derived measurements. Moreover, exploratory analyses were performed to assess predictors of measurement error. Mean HR measures showed the best accuracy over all conditions. HRV measures showed satisfactory accuracy in seated rest, paced breathing, and recovery conditions but not in dynamic conditions, including speaking. Accuracy was diminished by wrist movements, cognitive and emotional stress, nonstationarity, and larger wrist circumferences. Wrist SC measures showed neither correlation nor visual resemblance with finger SC signal, suggesting that the two sites may reflect different phenomena. Future studies are needed to assess the responsivity of wrist SC to emotional and cognitive stress. Limitations and implications for laboratory and ambulatory research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stressing the accuracy: Wrist‐worn wearable sensor validation over different conditions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Multiple wearable devices have been recently introduced in the market-including devices for tracking heart rhythm and daily activity and for hemodynamic monitoring-and their use is rapidly growing. Wearable devices may offer new data regarding patient health (20), which should help monitor patient condition. At the population level, these data serve as part of the larger trend of big data and artificial intelligence, which will likely play a role in better understanding vascular diseases, and defining patients at risk of developing disease or complications.…”

Section: Implanted and Wearable Devicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research in Vascular Medicine: Where We Are and Where We Are Going

Qanadli

2020

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Wearable chemosensors adopting electrochemistry and biofabrication methods provided breakthrough innovative sensors for potential applications in mobile and electronic health care, patient self-assessment and human motion detection (Qian & Long, 2017). Similarly, wearable devices were developed to monitor heartbeat and rhythm to track pulse pattern (Kwak, Kim, Park, Kim, & Seo, 2017;Pevnick, Birkeland, Zimmer, Elad, & Kedan, 2018). Incidentally, application of electronics to device-engineering for biofabrication leads to the invention of several flexible sensors focussing on detecting biological analytes, ions, light and pH (Han et al, 2017).…”

Section: Modern Er a B I Os En Sor S: Comb Ination Of B Iol Ab El Smentioning

confidence: 99%

“…TA B L E 1 Types of wearable sensors, application and principle with citationKwak et al (2017),Pevnick et al (2018) andHan et al (2017) …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Current technological trends in biosensors, nanoparticle devices and biolabels: Hi‐tech network sensing applications

Vigneshvar

Senthilkumaran

2018

Med Devices & Sens

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biosensors are micro‐analytical devices usually coupled to a bio‐integrated transducer that emits signal to measure specific molecules as an analyte, either qualitatively or quantitatively for various downstream applications. Improved detection methods at quantum level in nanoscale became a reality due to the invention of integrated circuits involving nanoparticle devices and biolabels. Next level of discoveries leads to the identification of novel particulates to improve the specificity and sensitivity for single analyte detection. Although different kinds of biosensors show promise for multifaceted applications in science and technology, certain limitations do exist in terms of portability, selectivity and sensitivity as well as in multi‐analyte detection. Recent methodical advancements involving nanomaterials or nanoparticles/metals in combination with biomarkers or biolabels as sensors provide new insights to solve these limitations to prepare flawless detecting devices. These technical advances are evident in modern‐day sensors including hand‐held, smartphone‐based, wearable and flexible sensors developed for multifaceted applications. This concise review article describes the new technological trends in the development of biosensors integrated to nanoparticle devices and/or biolabels involving hi‐tech network system for better efficiency. Future perspectives on new technological developments for effective combination of several nanomaterials and biolabels with strategic engineering methodology were highlighted.

show abstract

Wearable technology for cardiology: An update and framework for the future

Cited by 136 publications

References 38 publications

Stressing the accuracy: Wrist‐worn wearable sensor validation over different conditions

Stressing the accuracy: Wrist‐worn wearable sensor validation over different conditions

Research in Vascular Medicine: Where We Are and Where We Are Going

Current technological trends in biosensors, nanoparticle devices and biolabels: Hi‐tech network sensing applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About