Smart phone reading

[Dizzydebs1]

Hi. I’ve just learned that yet again my doc hasn’t sent my cardiology referral. I’m curious as to reading my smart phone data and tried to compare to hubbys but I can’t figure if hubbys data is just more detailed or that mine shows my heart rate stays up for extended periods.basically just if data from both of similer or if one of us may have an issue. This is my data .

[Buffafly]

Where is the data coming from?

[Dizzydebs1 in reply to Buffafly]

Hawuai smart watch . Activity tracker

[Buffafly in reply to Dizzydebs1]

I thought so - I have a similar watch but I have tested it against a Kardia and it's not very reliable. Hopeless in AF!

[Hidden]

That doesn't really show anything other than you either took your watch off or died for a few hours between 8:00 and 12:00

I would take any "smart" watch data with a pinch of salt. If you really want to know what is happening buy a Kardia monitor

[Dizzydebs1 in reply to Hidden]

Lol sounds about right

[CDreamer in reply to Hidden]

Agree - unless you are an athlete in training.

[CDreamer]

Hi Debs - maybe take the watch off for a few days, see how you feel. If you can feel yourself with an unusual HR for more than a few minutes - take you pulse and note the time, the activity you were doing and the HR & symptoms. Then take that to your doctor. You may be in danger of developing gadget anxiety.

All our HRs very considerably during the day - that’s a very good thing. Staying higher than 120 or below around 40 for constant periods of time ie hours whilst resting = bad thing - time to see a doctor.

The data you present seems meaningless to me as well and my daily readings range from 42-190 sometimes and I take absolutely no notice. Gadgets are all well and good if you are competent and not a worrier - but sometimes they can be more of a trial.

Hope that helps.

[momist]

Your 'smart watch' infers your pulse rate (NOT heart rate!) from the very slight reddening of the skin when the capillary blood vessels swell slightly as the blood pressure increases. Due to the way this is measured, it has to observe over longish periods and try to estimate a rhythm from that and then displays the average rate of the rhythm it thinks it has found. It cannot detect reliably what your heart is actually doing, only how your capillaries are responding, and then only approximately. This is great for an athlete wanting to know how much faster their heart is going when exercising, but no use in any medical way.

As others have said, get a Kardia, or equivalent.

[Dizzydebs1 in reply to momist]

Thanks for this explanation. Is there an equivalent to Kardia? I’m sort of doubting it . Will just have to hope the price comes down xxx

[momist]

Hi Dizzydebs. Yes, there are alternatives, but they are all more expensive. The common one is the Apple Watch with built in electrical heart monitor, but that also needs an iPhone to communicate with. This is very popular in the USA where they can afford it all. Other options are stand alone things, like a blood pressure monitor but with heart trace capability, all over £200.

I'm excitedly awaiting the new French offering from Withings, (withings.com/uk/en/) which will work with Android and looks like a lovely smart analogue watch that does what a FitBit does, but also has the electrical heart trace built in. I'd much rather have that than the plastic black FitBit. It is supposed to become available this summer some time.

[Dizzydebs1]

Cool I’ll look it up thanks