Beyond the wrist: Using a smartwatch electrocardiogram to detect electrocardiographic abnormalities.

BACKGROUND

When worn on the wrist, smartwatch electrocardiograms may provide important but incomplete information.

AIMS: We sought to evaluate the added benefit of placing the smartwatch on the ankle and on the chest to diagnose various electrocardiographic abnormalities compared with 12-lead electrocardiograms.

METHODS

Two hundred and sixty patients with (n=189) or without (n=71) known cardiac disorders underwent 12-lead electrocardiogram and smartwatch electrocardiogram recordings of lead I (AW-I) and of leads I and II and pseudo chest leads V1 and V6 (AW-4). AW-I and AW-4 diagnoses (three-cardiologist consensus) were compared with 12-lead electrocardiogram diagnoses (three-cardiologist consensus) to calculate sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

AW-I showed high accuracy for the diagnoses of atrial fibrillation (96% sensitivity, 91% specificity) and complete bundle branch block (85% sensitivity, 98% specificity). Compared with AW-I, AW-4 improved detection of an abnormal 12-lead electrocardiogram (91% vs. 80% sensitivity; P<0.01), atrial flutter/tachycardia (69% vs. 25% sensitivity; P=0.04), T-wave abnormalities (77% vs. 34% sensitivity; P<0.01), pathological Q-waves (41% vs. 7% sensitivity; P<0.01) and left anterior hemiblock (70% vs. 0% sensitivity; P=0.02). AW-4 also enabled better differentiation between atrioventricular block and sinus bradycardia (from 81% to 95% correct; P=0.03) and between atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter/tachycardia (from 71% to 89% correct; P=0.02), but not between bundle branch blocks (from 82% to 87% correct; P=0.57).

CONCLUSIONS

A smartwatch electrocardiogram on the wrist accurately diagnoses atrial fibrillation and bundle branch block. Recording additional leads significantly improves the accuracy of detecting an abnormal electrocardiogram and repolarization changes, and also allows for better differentiation of brady- and tachyarrhythmias.