Can pulse check by the photoplethysmography sensor on a smart watch replace carotid artery palpation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in cardiac arrest patients? a prospective observational diagnostic accuracy study

• Published in: BMJ open 2019-02, Vol.9 (2), p.e023627-e023627
• Main Authors: Lee, Yoonje, Shin, Hyungoo, Choi, Hyuk Joong, Kim, Changsun
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Age; Aged; Cardiac arrest; Cardiopulmonary resuscitation; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation - instrumentation; Carotid arteries; Carotid Artery, Common; CPR; Emergency Medicine; Emergency Service, Hospital; Female; Heart; Heart attacks; Humans; Male; Medical diagnosis; Middle Aged; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - therapy; Palpation; Patients; Photoplethysmography - instrumentation; Physicians; Prospective Studies; Pulse - methods; Sensitivity and Specificity; Sensors; Veins & arteries
• ISSN: 2044-6055; 2044-6055
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023627

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess whether a photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor in a smart watch can accurately recognise the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in cardiac arrest patients compared with carotid artery palpation.MethodsThis prospective observational study was conducted on 50 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients who visited the emergency department (ED) of one tertiary hospital. As soon as the patient arrived at the ED, advanced cardiac life support was carried out immediately. At this time, three smart watches were attached to the carotid artery, forehead and wrist and were checked for pulse measurements every 2 min. In the case of ROSC, blood pressure, heart rate and heart rate regularity were confirmed, and pulse was simultaneously measured at three sites with smart watches. In the case of no ROSC, only the pulse was measured at three sites with the smart watches.ResultsThere were 33 males (66%) and the mean age was 68±11.57 years. In 14 patients (28%), spontaneous circulation was recovered through cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and all survived. The sensitivity and specificity of manual palpation were 78.6% and 90.4%, respectively. False-positive and false-negative rates were 9.6% and 21.4%, respectively. Smart watches at all three sites had the same or higher sensitivity than manual palpation. The sensitivity of the smart watch was the highest, at 100%, in the carotid region and the lowest, at 78.6%, in the wrist region. The specificity of the smart watch was the highest, at 100%, in the wrist region and the lowest, at 78.7%, in the carotid region.ConclusionCompared with manual pulse check, the PPG sensor embedded in the smart watch showed the same sensitivity and a higher specificity for recognising ROSC when measured at the wrist.