Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Nov 28;19(11):843-852.
doi: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2022.11.004.

Validating the accuracy of a multifunctional smartwatch sphygmomanometer to monitor blood pressure

Li Yi  1 , Zhong-Hua Lv  2   3 , Shun-Ying Hu  1   2 , Yu-Qi Liu  1   2 , Jia-Bing Yan  4 , Hui Zhang  4 , Hong-Bao Li  4 , Qin Chen  4 , Yue-Yang Li  1   2 , Yu-Fan Jiang  3 , Hao Zhou  3 , Mu-Ding Li  3 , Run-Du Chen  3 , Xiao-Long Li  2   3 , Shan-Shan Zhou  1   2 , Yun-Dai Chen  1   2
Affiliations

Validating the accuracy of a multifunctional smartwatch sphygmomanometer to monitor blood pressure

Li Yi et al. J Geriatr Cardiol. .

Abstract

Background: Hypertension is the most modifiable factor associated with cardiovascular events and complications. The conventional blood pressure (BP) meter method is simple but is limited in terms of real-time monitoring abnormal BP. Therefore, the development of a multifunction smartwatch (HUAWEI WATCH D) sphygmomanometer could significantly improve integrated BP monitoring.

Methods: We enrolled 361 subjects from Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China to validate the accuracy of the smartwatch versatile sphygmomanometer using ISO 81060-2:2018. Resting and ambulatory BP accuracy of the smartwatch were compared with gold standard clinical sphygmomanometers using ISO 81060-2:2018 guidelines, the accuracy of 24 h systolic blood pressure (SBP) circadian rhythm monitoring, and diurnal high SBP alert for this smartwatch were assessed using a confusion matrix approach. Additionally, we analyzed online users of different ages for compliance.

Results: Eighty-five subjects underwent resting BP measurements; the mean resting BP differences between two devices were -0.683 ± 6.203 mmHg (SBP) (P = 0.723) and 1.628 ± 5.028 mmHg (diastolic blood pressure, DBP) (P = 0.183). In 35 subjects' ambulatory BP measurements, the mean differences of ambulatory BP were -1.943 ± 5.475 mmHg (SBP) (P = 0.923) and 3.195 ± 5.862 mmHg (DBP) (P = 0.065). All data complied with ISO 81060-2:2018 guidelines (mean ≤ ±5 mmHg and standard deviation ≤ ±8 mmHg) with no significant differences. Positive predictive values (PPV) of resting SBP and DBP were 0.635 and 0.671, respectively. The PPV of ambulatory SBP and DBP were 0.686. Also, 24 h SBP circadian rhythm monitoring was performed in 107 subjects: accuracy = 0.850, specificity = 0.864, precision/PPV = 0.833, sensitivity = 0.833, and F1-measure (F1) = 0.833. The accuracy, specificity, precision, sensitivity, and F1 values in 85 subjects undergoing diurnal high SBP alerting were 0.858, 0.876, 0.706, 0.809, and 0.754, respectively.

Conclusions: When compared with the gold standard clinical sphygmomanometer, smartwatch results were consistent and accurate. Online user feedback showed that elderly individuals cared more about BP monitoring accuracy, with better compliance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flow diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bland-Altman plot of the differences between the test BPs with reference BPs in the ambulatory BP measurement study. (A): SBP; (B): DBP.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Bland-Altman plots of the differences between the test BPs with reference BPs in the ambulatory BP group. (A): SBP; (B): DBP.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Age distribution of resting blood pressure, AMBP, and user feedback.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kumar M Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392:1923–1994. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32225-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aekplakorn W, Suriyawongpaisal P, Tansirisithikul R, et al Effectiveness of self-monitoring blood pressure in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. J Prim Care Community Health. 2016;7:58–64. doi: 10.1177/2150131915614069. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Joint Committee for Guideline Revision 2018 Chinese Guidelines for Prevention and Treatment of Hypertension-A report of the Revision Committee of Chinese Guidelines for Prevention and Treatment of Hypertension. J Geriatr Cardiol. 2019;16:182–241. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lin H J, Wang T D, Chen M Y C, et al 2020 consensus statement of the taiwan hypertension society and the taiwan society of cardiology on home blood pressure monitoring for the management of arterial hypertension. Acta Cardiologica Sinica. 2020;36:537. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stergiou GS, Palatini P, Parati G, et al 2021 European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J Hypertens. 2021;39:1293–1302. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002843. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources