Heart rate monitor?

[Lydia1960]

Am wishing to monitor my heart and am thinking of buying a heart rate monitor. Thinking of perhaps a heart rate monitor wristwatch, or a portable ecg, ekg machine heart beat monitor. Does anyone know which one would be the most effective or are they of equal worth? Do they monitor the heart as well as a hospital's ecg device?

[skid112 Heart Star]

Hi Lydia, bit of a thread here, healthunlocked.com/bhf/post...

Generally chest strap devices tend to be more efficient

[Lydia1960 in reply to skid112]

Checked them out, but they don't seem to measure ecg? That's what I really need it for. Would a wristwatch, with strap etc, be better at monitoring the heart, overall, rather than one that measures ecg? To give a more accurate reading of how your heart is functioning?

[skid112 Heart Star in reply to Lydia1960]

What are you looking for it to do? And could you read an ECG? Most on here have been given target peaks for heart rate

[Lydia1960 in reply to skid112]

I just want to check on the healthiness of my heart. Was under the impression that with handheld ecg devices they provide details as to the reading of the results? Haven't been given a target rate. Just worried about the condition of my heart after years of chronic stress. Am age 57...

[Lydia1960 in reply to skid112]

Found this on stressnomore.co.uk.

Beurer PM45 heart rate monitor. This has a chest strap and also includes ecg. This would be a good monitor for all my needs, no? And seems cheaper than a Fitbit?

[JakJenLew in reply to Lydia1960]

Do you see a cardiologist and can you read an ecg ... I feel you are better leaving it to the professionals for an ecg because I don't think it would be anything like an ecg you would receive in hospital... ♥️

[Lydia1960 in reply to JakJenLew]

Not sure, but I believe the devices give you details as to what the ecg readings mean. Can contact supplier to find that out.

Have been having pain in my heart area, but all the checks come back clear. Was told that single ecgs don't always give out accurate readings as they can only catch that moment, so want to get an ecg device to keep a monitor on this.

[JakJenLew in reply to Lydia1960]

I just don't feel that something that costs £47.99 is going to give you an accurate reading as an ecg at hospital would ... ♥️

[Lydia1960 in reply to JakJenLew]

Good point!

[JakJenLew]

As skid 112/ Mark said leave the ecg to the professionals are you under cardiology if you want to keep track of your heart rate either use a fit bit or oximeter... ♥️

[Lydia1960 in reply to JakJenLew]

Thanks for this advice. Wanted to keep a check on my heart via an ecg, but if you think a Fitbit would be best, I shall look into this...

[ian_hughes_]

I've got aTomTom Runner3 it is one of the more accurate heart monitors without a chest strap. I like to record effort during activity and review it later, however if you are beta blocked like me you can be working quite hard without taking your heart rate that high. My cardio physio's advice was to go by feel anyway. It isn't a day long wear for me like the fit bit might be, but it does do steps, calories heart rate etc. while I'm wearing it. Horses for courses.

[Lydia1960 in reply to ian_hughes_]

Everyone seems to be recommending one of these types and you're obviously all quite knowledgeable on this topic, so I am listening and taking on board what is being written. Thanks for your experience on this one..

[Marc68]

No portable unit, whether that's a ECG or heart rate monitor, is going to be as accurate as a professional unit used in hospitals. All portables have limitations, whether that's accuracy, strength of signal, or their "real time" monitoring abilities. You get what you pay for and a cheap unit is never going to be as good as a more expensive model.

What you first need to decide is exactly what you want it to do, and then decide which model fits within your budget. As others have said, interpreting an ECG reading is for professionals only. i've looked at my readings taken in hospital a few times and tried to figure out what it all meant and it's not easy. You really need to be trained to see what the small peaks and troughs mean.

Ignoring the benefits of a HR fitness tracker for a moment, most people only want to see what their heart rate is doing so they can see if everything is okay, or perhaps more importantly, if something's wrong, and for most a wristwatch style optical HR monitor is fine. If you want more accuracy then a chest strap gives better results.

Some of this thread may help.. healthunlocked.com/bhf/post...

I've found my Garmin Vivoactive HR pretty accurate when compared to the chest strap monitor, and hand grip monitors, I use on my exercise bike and also the HR on my BP machine so I'm happy it's there or thereabouts.

[Lydia1960 in reply to Marc68]

I have been suffering from chronic stress for quite some time and stress hormones released internally, have prematurely aged me. I have diabetes, atherosclerosis, hyper familial hypercholesterolemia, ibs, and other conditions. All, together with the premature aging, makes it difficult for me to exercise for any length of time without feeling fatigued, which I do feel for most of the time.

Have had some sharp pains in my heart region, probably caused by stress, which has stopped now, and there's a dull ache there continuously. All results, ecgs, echocardiogram, chest x-Ray, blood tests have come back clear, but as I am NOT in the best of health, I worry about all aspects to it, including my heart.

What I want and need a device to do, is give me warnings of any impending heart problems that could prove serious if not treated. That's why I was thinking of a handheld portable ecg. As you say, like most people,to inform me if anything is wrong.

Would a Garmin Vivoactive HR, or something equivalent do this? As someone wrote, on that thread link, their fitbit heart rate monitor picked up tachycardia events, which they related to their cardiologist. Would these devices warn me about the possibility of heart failure for instance? Or any of the other major heart problems. Are the results easy to read(technophobe here!). Do they require a smartphone? Or laptop? Not good with technology, so how simple are they to use, operate?

[Marc68 in reply to Lydia1960]

I'm sorry to hear about all of your illnesses Lydia. I can't imagine how hard it must be to cope with all of that, and also have concerns about your heart.

I'm no medical professional so please don't take my advice as gospel but it depends on whether you want something to help with diagnosis, or just something that tells you when something is happening.

If you want something to help with diagnosis of possible problems then an ECG may be your answer but only in as much as your Dr. might be able to use the results to identify potential issues, some of which may be intermittent and not picked up at the time of their tests.

If you want something that will give you a realtime snapshot of what your heart is doing then a HR monitor such as a Fitbit, Garmin etc should suffice. They can't warn about the possibility of anything happening as they only measure what is going on at that moment in time, such as a heart attack, tachycardia, bradycardia etc. Some can record these things but they aren't a diagnosis tool, at least not in terms of telling you if something might happen in the future.

There are different types of HR monitors. A wristwatch type is quickest and easiest to read. You can also get a wrist band that has to be read off a smartphone or tablet/laptop. If you use a chest strap you still need either a watch style, phone or tablet to read what the strap is telling it (via bluetooth).

Another monitoring option, although not as portable, might be to use a blood pressure monitor with HR monitoring function. I've had bad experiences with GP's but one told me (when I went in to see him about chest pains) that he works on a two out of three rule. Those being pain, heart rate and blood pressure. If you have chest pain and your BP goes haywire then get to hospital, If you have pain and your heart rate is way up or down, get yourself to hospital. I'm not sure how true, or safe, that method is though. You'd need to find what your normal numbers are so you have a datum to measure against but again, these can't be used for diagnosis.

Hope some of that helps but as mentioned, you have to decide exactly what you want it to do... diagnosis or monitoring.

[Lydia1960 in reply to Marc68]

Checked on Amazon. Would something like KOBWA Bluetooth wristband fitness tracker with blood pressure, heart rate monitor be what you are referring to?

All my tests results have come back clear, but as I still have a dull pain in my chest, and feeling very fatigued, weak, I am worried.

They have said I don't need a cardiac stress test. That is what I am really looking for right now. Worried about heart failure as my pulse goes as low as under 50 bpm at times. Would a HR Garmin or equivalent provide that detail, by showing how the heart performs under duress, exercise? Or over a length of time in different poses? Or would a ecg be more pertinent for this?

[Marc68 in reply to Lydia1960]

The one you refer to is a typical optical wristwatch style monitor but I can't vouch for it's accuracy, capabilities or quality. Like everything, you get what you pay for so don't expect a £30-£40 unit to be as good as a £100+ unit.. it simply isn't going to happen. What often suffers is the accuracy of the heart rate as the optical sensors are usually on the cheap end of the scale to keep costs down.

You may be getting confused as to what a cardiac stress test fully comprises of. There's more to it than just measuring your HR as you exercise. They measure all sorts of things when you're connected to an ECG and you won't get all of that with a HR monitor.

A good HR monitor will give you your heart rate and track it over the period of time you wear it. It will show your heart rate as it changes but it won't tell you how much blood is flowing through your heart, or show up any murmurs for instance.

[Lydia1960 in reply to Marc68]

So if I do decide to invest in a HR monitor then, as you point out, it needs to be over £100 to be an efficient one.

Checked out a Doppler ultrasound device on Amazon. This is probably more what I really need. To analyse vascular diseases, especially with me having atherosclerosis and diabetes type 2. So thank you for that knowledge. I can check with the suppliers exactly what the device can and cannot do. This is a brilliant idea...

[Marc68 in reply to Lydia1960]

I can only go on the one I chose but it stands to reason that a unit that uses cheaper parts, and which hasn't had much R&D carried out, isn't going to match the better quality units. If you read reviews you can get an idea of recurrent problems. I use £100 as an arbitrary figure only.

Likewise, I only mentioned blood flow to highlight the fact that HR monitors can't do everything. I wasn't implying you would need to monitor blood flow. I don't know anything about using an ultrasound device, or their capabilities. They may not be any use to you whatsoever.. I just don't know, sorry.

I really think you need to talk to your Dr. before shelling out money on something that might not be of any use to you.

[Lydia1960 in reply to Marc68]

Yes, that is very good advice.About speaking to my doctor before actually buying one of these devices. But just to have that knowledge that they are there should it prove necessary, especially if the NHS are cuttingcosts and therefore not offering their patients the tests needed to investigate ongoing serious problems..

And, indeed,if I do decided to buy any of the devicesyou mentioned, then it would be a very good idea to see how the sellers claims match up to the buyers'reviews.. thanks for that suggestion. This has all provided me with the vital information I will need to make a decision ..

[rouluer]

A chest strap HR monitor is always the best, whilst the wrist ones are getting better, sweat causes the strap to slide and miscalculates HR, you don't want to have the watch strap tight. I use Garmin, Suunto is another good product (wrist watch included). The best way is to wear the HR monitor/watch firstly overnight, when you wake up sit on the side of the bed and take you reading this will be your resting HR (you'll need to wear the watch overnight any slight bit of walking won't give you a correct rest reading). Once this is obtained enter this on your watch manually, plus your weight, height, age. Now you don't need to wear any HR monitor in bed again only for later when you get fitter.

Can you please tell if this monitoring is your desire to improve fitness or to just measure your HR? I wouldn't bother with the later unless you have been told to do so by your Doctor.

[Lydia1960 in reply to rouluer]

This is all sound, good advice, which is invaluable to me. Thanks.

I really need a device that will indicate if their is any malfunctioning of my heart or any related aspect to it. Would a Garmin, or equivalent, be able to do this?

Really worried about my physical health and do try to exercise as much as possible, usually doing the required 10,000 steps + each day and trying to eat healthily too...

[rouluer in reply to Lydia1960]

I don't have any other suggestion, for me a HR strap/watch is the best. Your HR changes all the time, if your tired HR increases, if you worried or depressed your HR is higher. If your fitter or relaxed its'lower. What a HR monitor will do is provide an analysis of how your heart is functioning and improving. An ECG is too technical for me and is a Cardiologist tool, take an ECG your HR could be 80 take it again it could be 75, it's the mean you need a HR monitor will do that. ECG provides heart symptoms more indepth.

I would only buy a Garmin or Suunto. Companies who invest in high tech research and have the money to do so.

[rouluer in reply to rouluer]

I should say with a Garmin for example you connect to "Garmin Connect" software by bluetooth via your mobile and creates graphs etc of your HR performance. Like walk 5km average HR, zone #, point of highest rate, lowest rate and you can see on where on GPS google maps. Was it because I walked up hill then etc or that's when I increased my speed.

[Lydia1960 in reply to rouluer]

So a Garmin etc would be able to tell you if your heart rate was continuously slow or fast, alerting you to a problem if it persisted? But wouldn't a pulse oximeter do this? Or is the information more indepth because it can be recorded at length and therefore indicate, more accurately, where any problems might be, and thus your GP could be informed for further investigations, if needing them?

[Lydia1960 in reply to Lydia1960]

So, in a way, more accurate than a handheld ecg, because that would be recording while at rest, so there won't be any strain on the heart while it is recording, thus a Garmin, would be providing a better overall picture of your heart's functioning...? In the long term..?

[rouluer in reply to Lydia1960]

HR monitors are for exercise not for rest. For readings other than exercise I would speak to your Cardiologist or GP.

[Lydia1960 in reply to rouluer]

That's what I meant to say. With HR monitors, they are recording your heart functioning all the time, so if it is too high, or too low, continuously, then that would flag up that something might need investigating. Something that a handheld ecg, wouldn't be able to do.

[skid112 Heart Star in reply to Lydia1960]

None of us on here are doctors. If you feel there is something wrong with your heart I suggest you go back and see you gp for another referral. A shop bought monitor is a waste of your time and money as it won't do what you want it to do

[Lydia1960 in reply to skid112]

Perhaps I should raise the points here that you have all made to my GP to see what they suggest? They maybe able to give me a clearerpictureas to what I need to keep a check on things. Thanksall for your advise and knowledge. You have certainly given me food for thought on this subject..

[Prada47]

Hi Lydia

I wish there was something that you could wear that would forewarn of impending Heart Problems.

A Holter Monitor measures your HR over a prolonged period, but I think you can only have one from the Hospital as they require a very experienced operator to fit one, and then read the results.

At the end of the day only a Cardiologist can say if you have a Heart problem and the Standard Tests are as you say ECG, Echocardiogram, and then if required a Bruce Protocol Test aka a Stress Exercise Test. These Test can then lead on to other Tests like an MRI scan, a MUGA scan and a Myocardial Profusion Scan all of which need to be evaluated by experts. I think after having these Test the final Gold Standard Test is the Angiogram.

Heart Failure can be detected by the Echo Test as it measures the output of the Left Ventricle which I believe is the indication of Heart Failure along with Being Short of Breath and Easily Fatigued.

I am following this thread with great interest to see if there is any thing out there related to Heart Monitoring that is easily read and is also an accurate indication of a problem.

Regards

Prada

[Lydia1960 in reply to Prada47]

Thanks for this. Very informative. It doesn't look as if a HR Fitbit or equivalent would provide what I need, but I think what might be a good idea is to contact one or two of their suppliers to see what they have to say on this matter. They should have the exact information that is needed. Great post. Thanks!

[Hidden]

Hi, look at the polar range of watches and straps. They do more, and more accurately, than fitbits. Until my cancer diagnosis I was running marathons and my husband has worked in the fitness industry for more than 20 years. Polar is always the favourite brand. Customer service is superb too, if anything goes wrong. Good luck! PS which? has a comparison survey for these devices too. Fitbits don't rate well for accuracy although none of these devices are suitable for managing cardio care such as ecg etc.

[Lydia1960 in reply to Hidden]

I'll check these out, and give the which? Comparison survey a view. There are so many different HR monitors etc to choose from that, if I do decide to get one, I will need to make that decision based on accurate information. So thanks for these ideas..

[Twobells]

Personally in your situation go and see your GP and relay your fears. Don't ask the suppliers for advice they will have sales target. FCG monitor from hospital over few days would pick up any problems. Don't spend money at this point it maybe counter productive.

[Lydia1960 in reply to Twobells]

I think that is a very good suggestion. It would be a good idea to discuss my concerns with my GP to see what they say. As you say. It could prevent me buying a costly device that I don't need..

[scubascuba3]

Old thread this i know, but i just heard about this device which would have met your needs, including heart rate monitor and ECG.

I might even get one myself, £99. I already have a standard chest heart rate monitor i use for cycling, but the Kardia appears to go up a couple of levels

Kardia Mobile by AliveCor, Black 0.6oz amazon.co.uk/dp/B01A4W8AUK/...

[Lydia1960 in reply to scubascuba3]

Just checked it out. It seems to be quite an efficient unit and well praised by reviewers. Definitely worth looking into further. Yes, I was thinking of chest heart rate monitors, but as you point out, this equipment seems more advance... and accepted by doctors as being a credible assessor of heart disease.. so, thanks for this link. It’s a great one..