01:07 - Source: CNN
How to train yourself to exercise in the morning

Story highlights

A small study finds that some activity tracker heart rate monitors are more accurate at rest

The study measured the devices' performance against an ECG

Researcher: "We've had so much advance in technology during such a short period"

CNN —  

The heart rate monitor inside your fitness tracker may not be as precise as the equipment used in doctors offices and hospitals, but researchers say the smartwatches and wristbands are accurate enough for most consumers’ needs.

When tested alongside electrocardiograph (ECG) technology, devices from Fitbit and Mio performed reasonably well at measuring resting and active heart rates, according to a study published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

“It’s very exciting because we’ve had so much advance in technology during such a short period,” lead researcher Lisa Cadmus-Bertram said. “These trackers are such an enormous improvement over what we used to have.”

For the small study, Cadmus-Bertram and her team at the University of Wisconsin looked at how the trackers worked for 40 healthy middle-age adults, compared with an ECG and against each other. The participants wore four devices during the test: a Fitbit Surge, a Fitbit Charge, a Mio Fuse and a Basis Peak smartwatch.

Compared with the ECG reading, wearable products varied in their accuracy. The Fitbit Charge performed the best at rest, measuring within 5 beats per minute of the ECG reading 95% of the time. The Basis Peak activity tracker was shown to be within 22.6 bpm of the ECG reading during the 10-minute resting test.

Accuracy lessened in all of the tested devices during increased activity. The monitors were off by a range of 20 to 40 beats per minute compared with ECG measurements. The findings that devices were more accurate during rest are similar to what previous research has found.

Although data were not provided to show readings at each measured time, Cadmus-Bertram suggested that outliers – numbers well outside normal readings – may have caused a wider range.

Critics question heart rate monitors

Critics, however, say that the devices are not performing up to their advertised promises and could supply users with dangerously inaccurate information.

Questions about the devices and their accuracy sparked a class-action lawsuit in 2016 over the technology in Fitbit trackers. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of people who bought Fitbits especially to help track their heart rates, whether for health reasons or to make sure they are getting the most out of their workouts. The lawsuit is ongoing.

“However accurate they may be at rest, the Fitbits are wildly inaccurate as heart rate monitors when worn during moderate- and high-intensity exercise, which is precisely the purpose for which Fitbit (in particular) markets them to consumers,” said Jonathan Selbin, one of the attorneys who filed the lawsuit.

Physicians and researchers note that the trackers aren’t medical devices. Selbin and others point out that Fitbit, in particular, “claims to be a ‘Digital Healthcare Company’ and is actively trying to get corporations and insurers to make health care decisions based upon data they collect.”