| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.19 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Introdução: A crescente utilização de Smartwatches (SW) com capacidade de registar sinais elétricos cardíacos tem aumentado. São escassos os dados quanto à eficácia de modelos Smartwatch Samsung. Este estudo centra-se no Samsung Galaxy Watch 4, avaliando se o registo obtido é semelhante à derivação DI obtida através do Eletrocardiograma (ECG) quando comparados os parâmetros eletrocardiográficos. Objetivos: Avaliar a eficácia do registo do sinal elétrico cardíaco realizado no Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 por comparação com a derivação eletrocardiográfica – DI – realizada num eletrocardiógrafo.
Metodologia: Estudo transversal, descritivo-correlacional, com uma amostra de 40 utentes. Realizaram-se simultaneamente os dois registos. Foram obtidas as variáveis quantitativas (Frequência Cardíaca (FC), Intervalo PQ e Duração do Complexo QRS) e qualitativas (Ritmo Cardíaco, Morfologia do Complexo QRS, Polarização da Onda P e Onda T, presença de sístoles prematuras supraventriculares e ventriculares), em ambos os registos. A análise estatística incluiu correlações de Bland-Altman e o teste de McNemar. Resultados: As médias da FC: 73,0 ± 10,8 bpm (ECG) e 75,8 ± 11,1 bpm (SW); do intervalo PQ: 161,5 ± 26,5 ms (ECG) e 162,7 ± 27,5 ms (SW); e da duração do Complexo QRS: 87,2 ± 13,3 ms (ECG) e 88,2 ± 15,1 ms (SW). Concordâncias foram r = 0,997 para FC, r = 0,993 para o intervalo PQ e r = 0,985 para a duração do complexo QRS, com viés médio reduzido. Não foram evidenciadas diferenças significativas nas variáveis qualitativas, com apenas um falso positivo de Fibrilhação Auricular no SW. Conclusão: O SW Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 apresenta elevada sensibilidade quando comparado com o ECG. Embora o uso deste SW não substitua o exame gold standard, apresenta potencial para ser integrado como ferramenta de rastreio, reforçando a necessidade de ocorrer uma validação clínica posterior dos algoritmos do SW.
ABSTRACT Introduction: The increasing use of smartwatches capable of recording cardiac electrical signals has grown substantially. Data on Samsung Smartwatch models remains limited. This study focuses on the Samsung Galaxy Watch 4, evaluating whether its recordings are comparable to lead I of a 12-lead electrocardiogram when key electrocardiographic parameters are assessed. Objectives: Evaluate the effectiveness of recording the cardiac electrical signal using the Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 by comparing it to an electrocardiographic lead (DI) recording performed on an electrocardiograph. Methods: A cross-sectional, descriptive-correlational study was conducted with 40 participants. Simultaneous recordings with a 12-lead ECG and the Galaxy Watch 4. Quantitative variables (heart rate, PQ interval, QRS duration) and qualitative variables (cardiac rhythm, QRS morphology, P and T-wave polarity, presence of supraventricular and ventricular premature beats) from both devices. Statistical analysis included Bland–Altman correlations and McNemar’s test. Results: Mean HR was 73.0 ± 10.8 bpm by ECG and 75.8 ± 11.1 bpm by SW. Mean PR interval was 161.5 ± 26.5 ms (ECG) versus 162.7 ± 27.5 ms (SW). Mean QRS duration was 87.2 ± 13.3 ms (ECG) versus 88.2 ± 15.1 ms (SW). Concordance coefficients were r = 0.997 for HR, r = 0.993 for PR interval, and r = 0.985 for QRS duration, with minimal mean bias. No significant differences were found in qualitative variables, and there was only one false-positive atrial fibrillation detection by the smartwatch. Conclusion: The Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 demonstrates high sensitivity when compared with the 12-lead ECG. While it does not replace the gold-standard ECG, it shows promise as a screening tool, underscoring the need for further clinical validation of its algorithms.
ABSTRACT Introduction: The increasing use of smartwatches capable of recording cardiac electrical signals has grown substantially. Data on Samsung Smartwatch models remains limited. This study focuses on the Samsung Galaxy Watch 4, evaluating whether its recordings are comparable to lead I of a 12-lead electrocardiogram when key electrocardiographic parameters are assessed. Objectives: Evaluate the effectiveness of recording the cardiac electrical signal using the Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 by comparing it to an electrocardiographic lead (DI) recording performed on an electrocardiograph. Methods: A cross-sectional, descriptive-correlational study was conducted with 40 participants. Simultaneous recordings with a 12-lead ECG and the Galaxy Watch 4. Quantitative variables (heart rate, PQ interval, QRS duration) and qualitative variables (cardiac rhythm, QRS morphology, P and T-wave polarity, presence of supraventricular and ventricular premature beats) from both devices. Statistical analysis included Bland–Altman correlations and McNemar’s test. Results: Mean HR was 73.0 ± 10.8 bpm by ECG and 75.8 ± 11.1 bpm by SW. Mean PR interval was 161.5 ± 26.5 ms (ECG) versus 162.7 ± 27.5 ms (SW). Mean QRS duration was 87.2 ± 13.3 ms (ECG) versus 88.2 ± 15.1 ms (SW). Concordance coefficients were r = 0.997 for HR, r = 0.993 for PR interval, and r = 0.985 for QRS duration, with minimal mean bias. No significant differences were found in qualitative variables, and there was only one false-positive atrial fibrillation detection by the smartwatch. Conclusion: The Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 demonstrates high sensitivity when compared with the 12-lead ECG. While it does not replace the gold-standard ECG, it shows promise as a screening tool, underscoring the need for further clinical validation of its algorithms.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Eletrocardiograma Smartwatch Eficácia Precisão Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 Electrocardiogram Effectiveness Accuracy MGATS