Skip to main content
Dryad logo

Assessment of Apple Watch Series 6 pulse oximetry and electrocardiograms in a pediatric population

Citation

Littell, Lauren et al. (2022), Assessment of Apple Watch Series 6 pulse oximetry and electrocardiograms in a pediatric population, Dryad, Dataset, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.gf1vhhmsh

Abstract

Background:

Recent technologic advances have resulted in increased development and utilization of direct-to-consumer cardiac wearable devices with various functionality. This study aimed to assess Apple Watch Series 6 (AW6) pulse oximetry and electrocardiography (ECG) in a cohort of pediatric patients.

Results:

A total of 84 patients were enrolled over a 5-week period. 68 patients (81%) were placed into the SpO2 and ECG arm, with 16 patients (19%) placed into the SpO2 only arm. Pulse oximetry data was successfully collected in 71/84 (85%) patients and ECG data in 61/68 (90%). ΔSpO2 between modalities was 2.0±2.6% (r=0.76). ΔRR was 43±44msec (r=0.96), ΔPR 19±23msec (r=0.79), ΔQRS 12±13msec (r=0.78), and ΔQT 20±19msec (r=0.9). The AW6 automated rhythm analysis yielded a 75% specificity and found:  1) 40/61 (65.6%) “accurate”, 2) 6/61 (9.8%) “accurate with missed findings”, 3) 14/61 (23%) “inconclusive”, and 4) 1/61 (1.6%) incorrect.

Conclusion:

The AW6 can accurately measure oxygen saturation when compared to hospital pulse oximeters in pediatric patients and provide good quality single lead ECGs that allow for accurate measurement of RR, PR, QRS, and QT intervals with manual interpretation. The AW6-automated rhythm interpretation algorithm has limitations for smaller pediatric patients and patients with abnormal ECGs.

Methods

This single-center, prospective study enrolled pediatric patients ³ 3kg and having an ECG and/or pulse oximetry (SpO2) as part of their planned evaluation. Exclusion criteria: 1) non-English speaking patients and 2) patients in state custody. Simultaneous tracings were obtained for SpO2 and ECG with concurrent standard pulse oximeter and 12-lead ECG. AW6 automated rhythm interpretations were compared to physician over-read and categorized as accurate, accurate with missed findings, inconclusive (automated interpretation: “inconclusive”), or inaccurate.