Accurate HR monitoring

[L14MMD]

Hi, First time poster here!

My name is Liam, 58 yr old male from west central Scotland. No previous heart/health issue's apart from dodgy knee's!

I was blue lighted to A&E on 30th Oct '23 with mild crushing type chest pains and in AF for what I think is the first time in my life. Echocardiogram has identified Moderate Left ventricular systolic dysfunction, and being treated with drugs at the moment.

MRI has shown no previous Ischaemia or heart attack, so Doc's unsure if heart pump failure was caused by the AF or vice versa? More tests to follow, including CT scan and another Echo to see if any improvement with the drugs.

I see lots reporting their heart rates and wondering which is the most accurate way of recording these? I have an Amazon smart watch linked to a "Fit Cloud Pro" app on my smartphone (Android) but I am not sure and believe in its accuracy. Is this what everyone else uses, or is there better out there?

Also are those mini ECG monitors worth investing in? Maybe im just getting a bit paranoid about keeping track of rates?

Thanks for listening. L

[BobD Volunteer]

Kardia is the gold standard but if you are the slightest bit likely to become fixated on such things best avoid as the stress and anxiety such gizmos can generate is highly counter porductive. Great if you are tryng to get diagnosis.

[L14MMD in reply to BobD]

Thanks, no I'm unlikely to become fixated on reading's. I was seeing my heart Failure Nurse at non hospital clinic and her Kardia type device wasn't working properly. She brought up the question of looking at my smartphone data, but as its just a cheap smartwatch I was hesitant to take it seriously. She seemed to think the data was fairly accurate. She was only looking for signs of change since last medication change. The info backed up her decision to change dose, my avg HR had lowered and BP also. The Kardia device might be worth investing in?

[mjames1]

Kardia 6L is the best for as needed. EKG's. Apple Watch the best for more continuous monitoring. Some of us have both.

A very small percentage of people report increased anxiety from monitoring. But most of us find it decreases anxiety by putting us more in control of our health.

Personally, as an a fib patient, I find them invaluable

Jim

[L14MMD in reply to mjames1]

Thanks Jim, yeah I can see how some can become fixated, but I'd rather look back and see /think about what caused or what I was doing if there was a marked change on readings. I had noticed a peak at certain times over a week long period, until I realised it was me taking it off to shower! False reading searching for a wrist. Data is fine, but it all depends on who and how it is interpreted.

Thanks again for your reply.

[bean_counter27 in reply to L14MMD]

KardiaMobile 6L is great. IMO its main drawback is that it doesn't monitor you for AF. You have to decide if and when to use and it only takes a 30 second snapshot.

I have paroxysmal AF - infrequent episodes lasting for a few hours to more than half a day before reverting back to normal sinus rhythm spontaneously.

If I feel like I'm having an episode I'll check with my Withings Scanwatch or if I'm home, my Kardia which is a lot more trustworthy.

I want to confirm if I'm having an episode so I can consider what led up to it (possible triggers) and to track for reporting to my cardiologist as he has no other way of knowing what happens between appointments, which are currently annual. This includes checking with Kardia if/when episode has finished so I know roughly how long it went for. Frequency, duration and impact (HR and symptoms) of episodes are all important info from my perspective.

There's also a Wellue device that can do 24 hour ECG recording, which I use periodically to see what might be happening that might otherwise go undetected i.e. not symptomatic enough for me to notice or occurring while I'm asleep.

The first time I wore the device I had an AF episode and I'll be sharing the associated report with my cardiologist at my upcoming annual check up to see whether he thinks it's worth the effort.

I suppose you need to determine what your needs are as there are a number of devices available and some are better suited to particular needs/circumstances

[JOY2THEWORLD49]

Hi

With AF the dr taking your h/rate best.

Next is ECG. My clinic has one.

And the 24-hr H/monitor best too.

I haven't any gadgets except my microlife BP monitor.

This is better than the other one I had because it doesn't show error with my AF but tells me the persistent AF bpm.

cheri Joy 75. (NZ)

[Ppiman]

If I were you, I would await the remaining tests before buying anything. I am a bit of a gadget person and use an Apple Watch with two Wellue AI ECG devices ( found the Kardia more limited and it was costing me a monthly fee). I find the devices useful, but the tests you are having will be useful to help find out what is happening.

Steve

[kkatz]

I use an alternative to Kardia which is called Emay.You really need the bluetooth one to use the app on your phone and send reports if needed.Same price as Kardia.

I also use an app called Fibricheck .readings look nothing like ECG trace but you learn to interpritate it.

[ozziebob]

Just to add to the description of the Kardia device (I have the 6L model which records extra "views" for professional interpretation), you can record and save ecgs without paying extra subscription fees for "advanced determinations", and you can vary the length of the recording from 30 secs-->5 mins, although the interpretation is based on the initial 30 secs. However I do recognise that for those with more "complicated" arrhymias than simple pAF, a subscription might be valuable, although very expensive for some.

I have attached an image of the 6 leads recorded by the 6L.

6 leads of Kardia 6L model

[Singwell]

6 lead Kardiamobile gets my vote. Personally I find the checking really helpful. I only do it if I notice changes. Really helpful if you're in AF as you can monitor progress.