Validation of the Polar V800 heart rate monitor and comparison of artifact correction methods among adults with hypertension

Burak Cilhoroz; David Giles; Amanda Zaleski; Beth Taylor; Bo Fernhall; Linda Pescatello

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240220

Validation of the Polar V800 heart rate monitor and comparison of artifact correction methods among adults with hypertension

PLoS One. 2020 Oct 8;15(10):e0240220. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240220. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Burak Cilhoroz^{1

2}, David Giles³, Amanda Zaleski^{1

4}, Beth Taylor^{1

4}, Bo Fernhall⁵, Linda Pescatello^{1

6}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Kinesiology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, United States of America.
² Department of Exercise Science, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, United States of America.
³ Health and Social Care Research Centre, University of Derby, Derby, United Kingdom.
⁴ Department of Preventive Cardiology, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, Connecticut, United States of America.
⁵ College of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America.
⁶ Institute for Systems Genomics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, United States of America.

Abstract

Heart rate variability (HRV) measurements via ambulatory monitors have become common. We examined the validity of recording R-R intervals using the Polar V800™ compared to 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECG) among middle-aged (44.7±10.1years); overweight to obese (29.8±4.3 kg.m-2) adults (n = 25) with hypertension (132.3±12.2/ 84.3±10.2 mmHg). After resting for 5-min in the supine position, R-R intervals were simultaneously recorded using the Polar V800™ and the 12-lead ECG. Artifacts present in uncorrected (UN) R-R intervals were corrected with the Kubios HRV Premium (ver. 3.2.) automatic (AC) and threshold-based (TBC) correction, and manual correction (MC) methods. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA), and effect sizes (ES) were calculated. We detected 71 errors with the Polar V800™ for an error rate of 0.85%. The bias (LoAs), ES, and ICC between UN and ECG R-R intervals were 0.69ms (-215.80 to +214.42ms), 0.004, and 0.79, respectively. Correction of artifacts improved the agreeability between the Polar V800™ and ECG HRV measures. The biases (LoAs) between the AC, TBC, and MC and ECG R-R intervals were 3.79ms (-130.32 to +137.90ms), 1.16ms (-92.67 to +94.98ms), and 0.37ms (-41.20 to +41.94ms), respectively. The ESs of AC, TBC, and MC were 0.024, 0.008, and 0.002, and ICCs were 0.91, 0.95, and 1.00, respectively. R-R intervals measured using the Polar V800™ compared to 12-lead ECG were comparable in adults with hypertension, especially after the artifacts corrected by MC. However, TBC correction also yielded acceptable results.

Publication types

Comparative Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Validation Study

MeSH terms

Adult
Aging / physiology
Artifacts*
Body Mass Index
Electrocardiography
Female
Heart Rate*
Humans
Hypertension / drug therapy
Hypertension / physiopathology*
Male
Middle Aged
Monitoring, Physiologic / methods*

Grants and funding

This study was supported by funding from the University of Connecticut Institute for Collaboration on Health, Intervention, and Policy (InCHIP) and the United States Department of Agriculture (SAES,HATCH Project No. CONS00954). Both funding were awarded to LSP. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.