I would personally like to see mechanisms in place that collect the data but prevent you from looking at every detail. Like something that gives you a monthly analysis or submits to a medical professional when an issue arises.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AliveCor Announces Apple Watch 'Kardia Band' for Medical Grade EKG Analysis
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would personally like to see mechanisms in place that collect the data but prevent you from looking at every detail. Like something that gives you a monthly analysis or submits to a medical professional when an issue arises.
Do you run the sleep monitoring function of HeartWatch and the sleep monitoring function of Sleep++ at the same time? Or just the sleep monitoring function of Sleep++/
Thank you for an informative reply. This section really struck me in that it seems to illustrate that the manufacturer's marketing division is working over time. They are producing a "medical grade device" that is currently under going FDA certification. Without knowing more, that is setting a really high bar in my mind. However, considering what you say, which seems reasonable, suggests that it may all be window dressing and marketing speak, which is depressing.
Based on other's replies, I get it: This can be a specialized device for special needs for people that have certain conditions. OTOH, it also seems that the manufacturer is looking to attract folks who think that other monitors are just not enough and this thing will provide the deep data they need so that they can micro-manage every last little aspect of their physiology to the gnat's eyelash. I dunno, maybe this device is meant to be sold to Drs as an alternative to current technology and thus this speculation is unwarranted. Still, I would not be surprised to see this advertised in the pages of People, Men's Health, and Fitness magazines. :-/
edits for brevity
Kind of thinking the same. Someone earlier in the thread even stated you need a 12-lead to detect afib, which is completely false. I suppose I understand the skepticism, but 1-lead ECGs are not a new invention and have their place in medical diagnosis and monitoring of arrhythmias. Especially for transient conditions a doctor is unable to replicate the issue with the patient in the office hooked up to a machine with more leads.
The unobtrusiveness of the 1-lead varieties are a big positive. I mentioned it earlier, but iRhythm's ZIO Patch 1-lead ECG is now often used in place of the traditional Holter 5- to 7-lead monitor. It's a little box the size of an Apple Watch that sticks to your chest and records continuously for 14 days, compared to the Holter's 2 days. Studies are starting to show that the results are as good or better, the longer watch window greatly improves likelihood of observing issues, and that patients greatly prefer them over the clunky Holters. The generated reports are absolutely fascinating. Here's an example of what a 1-lead can do: http://www.irhythmtech.com/media/files/Z100A4602.04 - ZIO PATCH REPORT SAMPLE (AF WITH TRIGGER).pdf
I guess I'm trying to say, despite opinions otherwise, this isn't hocus pocus. 1-lead ECGs are a real tool with real medical uses, being employed by real physicians and hospitals.
I have Sleep++ running on my watch and just use Heartwatch on my phone to display data. I guess you could use Heartwatch to also track sleep (it has the ability to do that if you install it on the watch) but I don't think it tracks the "restlessness" aspects of sleep the way Sleep++ does, just when you started and stopped sleep.
I think a lot of people are misunderstanding what the app is. It appears to be a passive sensor, meaning it is only activated when you touch it. That means not only can it not diagnose a heart attack if you have symptoms, it won't diagnose AF without you pressing it, meanly unless it's symptomatic AF (and many people aren't symptomatic) then it's useless. For me this reduces it's use; a passive monitor identifying potential AF would have been useful in identifying those asymptomatic patients at increased risk of stroke in the future (not immediate future - risk over years). Secondly, it is only meant to identify potential AF (atrial fibrillation) which does not cause heart attacks; while I am more experienced with three and "12 lead" (actually 10) ECGs, this device may be able to identify the typical irregular irregular rhythm of AF and guide diagnosis but by itself would not diagnose an MI or other significant arrhythmias. I imagine if an unusual rhythm is picked up your doctor* would call you in for a full 12 lead ECG.
* I work in the UK. I am so glad I do not have patients ringing me up with their Apple Watch results!
* I work in the UK. I am so glad I do not have patients ringing me up with their Apple Watch results!
EMS and Dr's in the ER diagnosis and treat arrhythmias all the time using a 3-lead ECG. As for being to far from the heart one of the recommended placements for the limb leads are the wrist, and ankles. Usually though you see them on the shoulders and lower abdomen though due to artifact from patient movement, which is less the closer to the core of the body.
It has been seen in the medical field for a while, just not in a watch. As for while you don't see this to much at a medical office or hospital you need a 4,12,15, or 18 lead ECG to diagnose certain arrhythmias. It's designed for non intrusive home monitoring.
[doublepost=1458157143][/doublepost]
From what I have read the app establishes a baseline heart rate. If the watch detects a rate outside of your norm or an irregular rate then it sends a notification to you to take a reading.I think a lot of people are misunderstanding what the app is. It appears to be a passive sensor, meaning it is only activated when you touch it. That means not only can it not diagnose a heart attack if you have symptoms, it won't diagnose AF without you pressing it, meanly unless it's symptomatic AF (and many people aren't symptomatic) then it's useless. For me this reduces it's use; a passive monitor identifying potential AF would have been useful in identifying those asymptomatic patients at increased risk of stroke in the future (not immediate future - risk over years). Secondly, it is only meant to identify potential AF (atrial fibrillation) which does not cause heart attacks; while I am more experienced with three and "12 lead" (actually 10) ECGs, this device may be able to identify the typical irregular irregular rhythm of AF and guide diagnosis but by itself would not diagnose an MI or other significant arrhythmias. I imagine if an unusual rhythm is picked up your doctor* would call you in for a full 12 lead ECG.
* I work in the UK. I am so glad I do not have patients ringing me up with their Apple Watch results!
I used to wear the Jawbone fitness band and the only thing I've missed in switching to the Apple Watch is the sleep monitoring. HeartWatch is better than the first one I tried, but I think Sleep++ will probably fit my needs better. I'll still use HeartWatch on my iPhone for its analysis.
I think your cynicism shows something of your age and your friend base. I know, when you're in your twenties and thirties this all seems like the minority obsession of a bunch of hypochondriacs. But once you pass fifty you'll start to see one of your friends after another discovering they need to closely track their heart health (or be screened for cancer every three months, or ...) and this is not hypochondria, it is what growing old is like :-(
And hell, it's not only old people --- I guy I worked with about 20 years ago died at age 30 from a congenital heart problem. Nowadays, suppose he had, at 25, wondered "how come my heart seems to occasionally feel weird?", decided to wear one of these things, captured some data that he could show a doctor, and had nitroglycerin prescribed? He might still be alive. As it was, I expect when he spoke to a doctor, he seemed an unlikely candidate for heart disease being so young, so few tests were done and he was dismissed as having panic attacks or something.
The ECG "rhythm" is only a representation not diagnostic. It cannot distinguish the cause of irregularity. AF has no sinus origin. Nor is it by any means the sole cause of rhythm irregularity. Because this isn't diagnostic then all it can ascertain is if the pulse is regular or not. You don't need a machine to tell you that. Take your own. Sometimes a little knowledge is a bad thing .....
[doublepost=1458158151][/doublepost]The ECG "rhythm" is only a representation not diagnostic. It cannot distinguish the cause of irregularity. AF has no sinus origin. Nor is it by any means the sole cause of rhythm irregularity. Because this isn't diagnostic then all it can ascertain is if the pulse is regular or not. You don't need a machine to tell you that. Take your own. Sometimes a little knowledge is a bad thing .....
[doublepost=1458158151][/doublepost]The ECG "rhythm" is only a representation not diagnostic. It cannot distinguish the cause of irregularity. AF has no sinus origin. Nor is it by any means the sole cause of rhythm irregularity. Because this isn't diagnostic then all it can ascertain is if the pulse is regular or not. You don't need a machine to tell you that. Take your own. Sometimes a little knowledge is a bad thing .....
I am in medical school and love innovations like this. I will buy an Apple watch when this type of feature is built into the watch and Apple OEM band so that it does continuous O2 sat, EKG, Blood glucose, and Heartrate. I just hope the FDA doesn’t obstruct Apple’s innovating.
Absolutely, you can detect Afib with a finger to the neck pulse (or wrist pulse). What you are looking for is an irregular pulse and weird P-wave. The AliveCor iPhone device records the 1-lead ECG, analyses the results, alerts you to unusual readings and allows you to send it to your EP specialist.
What's not to like? It's a life saver.
What I'd like to see eventually is continuous background monitoring in order to detect silent Afib episodes, but that needs a watch which doesn't need to be taken off the wrist to recharge.
Oh for goodness's sakes, adjust your expectations somewhere resembling realism
You do understand that a heart rate sensor and an ECG are two different things, right?
Sorry, I interrupted you with facts. My apologies! Carry on.
[doublepost=1458161430][/doublepost]
From page 1: The version with -K-, which is rarer in British English than in American English, is an early-20th-century loanword from the German acronym EKG for Elektrokardiogramm (electrocardiogram),[34] which reflects that German physicians were pioneers in the field at the time. Today AMA style and, under its stylistic influence, most American medical publications use ECG instead of EKG.[35] The German term Elektrokardiogramm as well as the English equivalent electrocardiogram consist of the New Latin/international scientific vocabulary elements elektro- (cognate electro-) and kardi- (cognate cardi-), the latter from Greek kardia (heart).[36]
Oh, and it's pretty sad (and scary) that you're trying to make them look stupid when you don't have command of basic grammar (hint: there/their/they're are different words that mean different things).
EKG is from the Greek roots, ECG is from the Latin roots. Both mean electrocardiogram, see http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/electrocardiogram
Bit like realize and realise. Pretty sad you don't understand they mean the same. Oh, and I guess you meant, "primary medical function of their device is".
I have the case - it was for the iPhone 5 so it just sits on my desk now, but it works nicely. I didn't buy it, but enrolled in a clinical trial from Stanford to monitor healthy people over time with it.
This give me a reason to get the Apple Watch...now if only it monitored in real time!
This give me a reason to get the Apple Watch...now if only it monitored in real time!
I don't see how requiring someone placing their fingers on the band is an acceptable solution. Even if you have a weird feeling such as a palpitation where you don't know if its gastrointestinal or your heart, it'll be over before you get a reading.
Unless and until i see real time, continuous monitoring, I'm not interested. It's a step forward, but we're still far away from this being useful, IMO.
Unless and until i see real time, continuous monitoring, I'm not interested. It's a step forward, but we're still far away from this being useful, IMO.
Assuming you're serious, IDK is I don't know. IDC is I don't care. I do care, but I just don't know if this is something I would want to buy as a separate add-on.
it seems like the goal of this is to simply tell if you're in afib or not. You don't need a whole device for that. You can teach someone in 10sec to check a pulse and anyone can tell if its regular or not.
BS....one lead ekg is not accurate...we need 12 ekg to get very accurate heart status.
EDIT: MUAHAHA. If you got that A.fib...or v.fib...you wouldn't depend on that. That watch might say.. "you're normal..there is nothing wrong you." You get that Pulmonary Embolism...you wouldn't be suing the company because you would be dead.
EDIT: MUAHAHA. If you got that A.fib...or v.fib...you wouldn't depend on that. That watch might say.. "you're normal..there is nothing wrong you." You get that Pulmonary Embolism...you wouldn't be suing the company because you would be dead.