{"title":"Einthoven and Precordial Lead Accuracy of Smartwatch-Acquired Electrocardiographs: A Review of the Literature","authors":"M. Wilkinson-Stokes","doi":"10.33151/ajp.17.816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction This review aims to summarise the literature regarding the ability of commercial smartwatch products to produce an electrocardiograph of diagnostic quality for interpreting Einthoven and precordial leads. Methods PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE Complete, Web of Science, and Scopus were systematically searched. Articles were screened by a sole investigator against the inclusion criteria – first by title, then abstract, then full text. The reference lists of included articles were also screened. The inclusion criteria were: discussion of smartwatch-acquired tracing of Einthoven or precordial lead accuracy, and demonstrating sufficient rigor when undergoing critical appraisal using the Joanna Briggs Institute evaluation tools. A synopsis of results was provided in a summary of information table. Results Twelve articles were identified for inclusion, nine of which had physician (cardiology or emergency specialty) evaluation of tracings, one of which had statistical comparison of wave duration and amplitude, and two of which were expert commentary. Only evaluations of Apple Watch products were discovered during the literature search. All leads in all studies were considered suitable for interpretation, with no clinically significant differences. Four studies found that 100% of patients were able to accurately use a smartwatch as an electrocardiogram after a brief tutorial. Conclusion The current early evidence, based largely on visual evaluations by cardiologists during the previous year, suggests that electrocardiograph abnormality recorded by this technology is sufficiently precise to be presumed accurate until proven otherwise.","PeriodicalId":340334,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Paramedicine","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Paramedicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.17.816","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Introduction This review aims to summarise the literature regarding the ability of commercial smartwatch products to produce an electrocardiograph of diagnostic quality for interpreting Einthoven and precordial leads. Methods PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE Complete, Web of Science, and Scopus were systematically searched. Articles were screened by a sole investigator against the inclusion criteria – first by title, then abstract, then full text. The reference lists of included articles were also screened. The inclusion criteria were: discussion of smartwatch-acquired tracing of Einthoven or precordial lead accuracy, and demonstrating sufficient rigor when undergoing critical appraisal using the Joanna Briggs Institute evaluation tools. A synopsis of results was provided in a summary of information table. Results Twelve articles were identified for inclusion, nine of which had physician (cardiology or emergency specialty) evaluation of tracings, one of which had statistical comparison of wave duration and amplitude, and two of which were expert commentary. Only evaluations of Apple Watch products were discovered during the literature search. All leads in all studies were considered suitable for interpretation, with no clinically significant differences. Four studies found that 100% of patients were able to accurately use a smartwatch as an electrocardiogram after a brief tutorial. Conclusion The current early evidence, based largely on visual evaluations by cardiologists during the previous year, suggests that electrocardiograph abnormality recorded by this technology is sufficiently precise to be presumed accurate until proven otherwise.
本综述旨在总结有关商业智能手表产品生产诊断质量心电图仪的能力的文献,以解释因托芬和心前导联。方法系统检索PubMed、Embase、MEDLINE Complete、Web of Science、Scopus。文章由一名单独的研究者根据纳入标准进行筛选——首先是标题,然后是摘要,然后是全文。还筛选了纳入文章的参考文献清单。纳入标准是:讨论智能手表获得的贝多芬追踪或心前导联准确性,并在使用乔安娜布里格斯研究所评估工具进行批判性评估时表现出足够的严严性。在资料摘要表中提供了结果摘要。结果共纳入12篇文章,其中9篇有内科医师(心内科或急诊专科)对示图的评价,1篇有波时和波幅的统计比较,2篇为专家评论。在文献检索中只发现了对Apple Watch产品的评价。所有研究的所有线索都被认为适合解释,没有临床显著差异。四项研究发现,经过简短的指导,100%的患者能够准确地使用智能手表作为心电图。目前的早期证据,主要是基于前一年心脏病专家的视觉评估,表明该技术记录的心电图异常足够精确,除非得到证明,否则可以假定是准确的。