A Novel Smartphone App for the Measurement of Ultra–Short-Term and Short-Term Heart Rate Variability: Validity and Reliability Study

Abstract

BackgroundSmartphone apps for heart rate variability (HRV) measurement have been extensively developed in the last decade. However, ultra–short-term HRV recordings taken by wearable devices have not been examined. ObjectiveThe aims of this study were the following: (1) to compare the validity and reliability of ultra–short-term and short-term HRV time-domain and frequency-domain variables in a novel smartphone app, Pulse Express Pro (PEP), and (2) to determine the agreement of HRV assessments between an electrocardiogram (ECG) and PEP. MethodsIn total, 60 healthy adults were recruited to participate in this study (mean age 22.3 years [SD 3.0 years], mean height 168.4 cm [SD 8.0 cm], mean body weight 64.2 kg [SD 11.5 kg]). A 5-minute resting HRV measurement was recorded via ECG and PEP in a sitting position. Standard deviation of normal R-R interval (SDNN), root mean square of successive R-R interval (RMSSD), proportion of NN50 divided by the total number of RR intervals (pNN50), normalized very-low–frequency power (nVLF), normalized low-frequency power (nLF), and normalized high-frequency power (nHF) were analyzed within 9 time segments of HRV recordings: 0-1 minute, 1-2 minutes, 2-3 minutes, 3-4 minutes, 4-5 minutes, 0-2 minutes, 0-3 minutes, 0-4 minutes, and 0-5 minutes (standard). Standardized differences (ES), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and the Spearman product-moment correlation were used to compare the validity and reliability of each time segment to the standard measurement (0-5 minutes). Limits of agreement were assessed by using Bland-Altman plot analysis. ResultsCompared to standard measures in both ECG and PEP, pNN50, SDNN, and RMSSD variables showed trivial ES (0.8). The nVLF, nLF, and nHF demonstrated a variation of ES (from trivial to small effects, 0.01-0.40), ICC (from moderate to nearly perfect, 0.39-0.96), and Spearman correlation coefficient values (from moderate to nearly perfect, 0.40-0.96). Furthermore, the Bland-Altman plots showed relatively narrow values of mean difference between the ECG and PEP after consecutive 1-minute recordings for SDNN, RMSSD, and pNN50. Acceptable limits of agreement were found after consecutive 3-minute recordings for nLF and nHF. ConclusionsUsing the PEP app to facilitate a 1-minute ultra–short-term recording is suggested for time-domain HRV indices (SDNN, RMSSD, and pNN50) to interpret autonomic functions during stabilization. When using frequency-domain HRV indices (nLF and nHF) via the PEP app, a recording of at least 3 minutes is needed for accurate measurement.