Cited by 87Non-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy

Comparison of SpO2 and heart rate values on Apple Watch and conventional commercial oximeters devices in patients with lung disease

Open access
Pipek, Leonardo Zumerkorn, Nascimento, Rafaela Farias Vidigal, Acencio, Milena Marques Pagliarelli, Teixeira, Lisete Ribeiro·2021·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Lung diseases have high mortality and morbidity, with an important impact on quality of life. Hypoxemic patients are advised to use oxygen therapy to prolong their survival, but high oxygen saturation (SpO 2) levels can also have negative effects. Pulse oximeters are the most common way to assess oxygen levels and guide medical treatment. This study aims to assess whether wearable devices can provide precise SpO 2 measurements when compared to commercial pulse oximeters. This is a cross-section study with 100 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and interstitial lung disease from an outpatient pneumology clinic. SpO 2 and heart rate data were collected with an Apple Watch Series 6 (Apple) and compared to two commercial pulse oximeters. The Bland–Altman method and interclass correlation coefficient were used to compare their values. We observed strong positive correlations between the Apple Watch device and commercial oximeters when evaluating heart rate measurements (r = 0.995, p < 0.001) and oximetry measurements (r = 0.81, p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference in the evaluation of skin color, wrist circumference, presence of wrist hair, and enamel nail for SpO 2 and heart rate measurements in Apple Watch or commercial oximeter devices (p > 0.05). Apple Watch 6 is a reliable way to obtain heart rate and SpO 2 in patients with lung diseases in a controlled environment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-021-98453-3

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The few existing studies do not investigate the effects of individual characteristics such as skin tone, compare across multiple devices, thoroughly examine performance in low ranges, or explore patterns of error and bias or missingness.

    “The few studies that do exist do not investigate the effects of individual characteristics (e.g., skin tone), compare across multiple devices or thoroughly examine performance in low ranges, or explore patterns of error and bias (e.g., consistent over- or underestimation of measurements) or missingness [10–13].”

    From Investigating the accuracy of blood oxygen saturation measurements in common consumer smartwatches (2023) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Methods (Data collection; no page supplied) say the study recorded skin color and measured SpO2 with an Apple Watch and two commercial oximeters. The Methods (Statistical analysis) and Results also report an analysis of measurement bias. These passages contradict the claim that this study did not examine individual characteristics, compare multiple devices, or explore bias; they do not establish whether it thoroughly examined low ranges or missingness. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pipek, L. Z., Nascimento, R. F. V., Acencio, M. M. P., & Teixeira, L. R.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • Faculdade de Medicina do ABC (BR)
Corresponding author
Pipek, Leonardo Zumerkorn
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2021-09-23
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
18901-18901
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3200444947
Cited by
87
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 19
FWCI
5.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Keywords
Apple Watch, wearable devices, pulse oximetry, SpO2 measurement, heart rate monitoring, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, interstitial lung disease, lung disease, device agreement, hypoxemia
MeSH terms
Wearable Electronic Devices, Oxygen Saturation, Aged, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oximetry, Wrist, Reproducibility of Results, Lung Diseases, Interstitial, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Healthy Volunteers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review