Massive Study Finds Apple Watch Can Detect Undiagnosed Heart Rhythm Problems (engadget.com) 67
An anonymous reader quotes Engadget:
Researchers from Stanford University's School of Medicine presented results from a giant study sponsored by Apple Inc. that showed the Apple Watch can sometimes spot patients with undiagnosed heart-rhythm problems, without producing large numbers of false alarms. The Apple-sponsored trial enrolled 419,297 people and was one of the largest heart-screening studies ever.
The study, details of which are being presented today at the American College of Cardiology conference in New Orleans, used the watch's sensors to detect possible atrial fibrillation... People who have atrial fibrillation are at risk of blood clots and strokes. In the U.S., it causes 750,000 hospitalizations a year and contributes to 130,000 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Because it doesn't always produce outward symptoms, it can go undiagnosed. According to results presented Saturday, about 0.5 percent of patients in the study -- or almost 2,100 people -- received notices from their watch indicating that they might have a heart-rhythm problem. That relatively low number showed that the technology wasn't inundating people with worrisome alerts.
People receiving a notification were asked to then wear an ECG (electrocardiography) patch, according to the Verge, adding that Stanford reports "84 percent of the time, participants who received irregular pulse notifications were found to be in atrial fibrillation at the time of the notification."
The dean of Stanford's medical school says the study "opens the door to further research into wearable technologies and how they might be used to prevent disease before it strikes."
The study, details of which are being presented today at the American College of Cardiology conference in New Orleans, used the watch's sensors to detect possible atrial fibrillation... People who have atrial fibrillation are at risk of blood clots and strokes. In the U.S., it causes 750,000 hospitalizations a year and contributes to 130,000 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Because it doesn't always produce outward symptoms, it can go undiagnosed. According to results presented Saturday, about 0.5 percent of patients in the study -- or almost 2,100 people -- received notices from their watch indicating that they might have a heart-rhythm problem. That relatively low number showed that the technology wasn't inundating people with worrisome alerts.
People receiving a notification were asked to then wear an ECG (electrocardiography) patch, according to the Verge, adding that Stanford reports "84 percent of the time, participants who received irregular pulse notifications were found to be in atrial fibrillation at the time of the notification."
The dean of Stanford's medical school says the study "opens the door to further research into wearable technologies and how they might be used to prevent disease before it strikes."
Re:"Sponsored by Apple" "can sometimes spot" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
...Because it’s not a medical device...
Then why is Apple sponsoring studies like this one, which give the implication it might be?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Then why is Apple sponsoring studies like this one, which give the implication it might be?"
Yes, let's spend a few millions of taxpayer money and let the scientists buy a couple of thousand Apple watches themselves just for the fun of doing a test.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: "Sponsored by Apple" "can sometimes spot" (Score:1)
Medical devices generally do not come with guaranteed results.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"Sponsored by Apple" "can sometimes spot" (Score:5, Insightful)
“The study is an important first step in figuring out how can we use these technologies in a way that’s evidence based,”
and
“Atrial fibrillation is just the beginning, as this study opens the door to further research into wearable technologies and how they might be used to prevent disease before it strikes”.
As for right now, even getting notification "sometimes" is better than "never".
Re:"Sponsored by Apple" "can sometimes spot" (Score:5, Informative)
This sounds like an incredible invasion of privacy. If the device was not designed to do this, and I didn't purchase it to do this, why is it doing this?
Perhaps because these people specifically volunteered for this study? Apple announced it from the stage of a keynote a year or two back and opened it up to the public that same day. Participants had to fill out medical forms and the usual medical waivers before they’d be a part of the study, so this isn’t a case of yet another big company harvesting data from unaware users like you’re trying to paint it.
Re:"Sponsored by Apple" "can sometimes spot" (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
First of all, the feature can't be triggered accidentally. You actually have to actively participate in this measurement. So any privacy concerns are pretty unfounded.
Secondly, it's designed to be a useful tool, but its sole purpose is not to detect irregular heart rhythms. It's something Apple thought they could do that would make the lives of some people better, so they did it. But that doesn't mean it's an actual medical-grade device. It's just good enough to tell you to contact your doctor so they can h
Re: (Score:2)
And cardiologists will soon be overloaded with work because many people have irregular heartbeats and in only a few of them this is problematic.
Re: (Score:2)
That assumes those with problematic irregular heartbeats will discover the problem independently, before it's too late to monitor and potentially correct.
And it opens the opportunity to do MORE research in discovering what is a "safe" irregular heartbeat and what is going to be problematic.
Atrial Fibrillation has a rather distinct signature on an ECG so it's not as
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's so much better to let people that wouldn't know that they have an irregular heartbeat die. I'm sure the cardiologists aren't going to be too concerned with the uptick in appointments—there doesn't appear to be a problem with false alarms. Like, that's in the first couple of lines of the *summary*.
Re: (Score:2)
But you as an old and grey slashdot visitor should know that nobody reads the articles ;).
Re: (Score:2)
This sounds like an incredible invasion of privacy. If the device was not designed to do this, and I didn't purchase it to do this, why is it doing this?
Watch for the EU to define a new Right To Die of Undiagnosed Heart Trouble. Brussels could then fine Apple a jillion kajilllion brazillion Euro for violating it.
Re: (Score:2)
Jealous that your government doesn’t give a shit about you?
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if you'd actually bothered to read the article, or any of the articles about the study when it launched, or any of the materiel and disclosures from the study itself; or if you'd bothered to educate yourself in any way whatsoever, you'd know that you had to volunteer and opt in by:
1) Downloading a separate app for the study
2) Read the agreement about what data is collected and how it is used
3) Explicitly agree to said agreement
4) Wait to be accepted into the study
5) Be notified that you were accepted
Re: "Sponsored by Apple" "can sometimes spot" (Score:2)
I have an actual arrythmia. I am probably alive cause my wife happens to be a doctor, saw the symptoms, had a stethoscope with her and told me to get my ass to the expert with an ECG RIGHT NOW. And the episode repeated with me being directly plugged into the ethernet for three weeks.
I would have volunteered any day of the week, and I already have a Kardia. Having the thing permanently attached would be a godsend.
And Apple did not breach privacy laws, nothing was done without anybodyâ(TM)s consent.
If y
Re: (Score:2)
What we need is an open standard for this data. I should be able to buy any heart rate monitor and have it report data back, with manufacturers able to certify devices to agreed standards.
There isn't anything particularly special about the Apple Watch heart rate monitor, other than the price tag. If we can make this more affordable and accessible (i.e. no Apple lock-in) it could be a great tool that a lot of people could benefit from.
Re: "Sponsored by Apple" "can sometimes spot" (Score:1)
Don't kid yourself, the heart rate monitor and other sensors being put in the Apple Watch are better than much of what's going into other devices, though they certainly aren't limited to Apple devices. The software however is the key though more than many of the sensors, that is something that Apple is putting a lot of effort into, as well as expense.
The funny thing is people especially android fanboys like to mock Apple, and honestly with good reason sometimes.
In many ways for most people the stuff being a
Then do it. (Score:2)
Re:"Sponsored by Apple" "can sometimes spot" (Score:5, Interesting)
Key phrases in the article. Looks more like damning with faint praise. Why only "sometimes"? For something that is worn as much as an Apple Watch, it should "nearly always" be able to spot a problem.
You REALLY don’t like Apple, do you? Because you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel to try and come up with anything against this.
Being able to cheaply (by medical standards) and passively detect a previously undiagnosed, major medical issue in 0.5% of participants with a false positive rate of 16% or less using a device that people are actually interested in regularly wearing (i.e. unlike most medical devices) is simply incredible. Doctors have no idea how prevalent some of these ailments actually are, since they tend not to see them until major symptoms start to present themselves or the person is already in a hospital setting for some other condition. If they’re able to start getting good data about how often and to whom these things happen in the population and how the symptoms develop across a wide number of people, they can start to understand the risk factors and develop better treatment plans.
This is a good thing, but you’re right, it should be better.
Thankfully, it already is. This study was started quite awhile ago, so it only included Series 3 and earlier Apple Watches. Notably, it didn’t include the Series 4 watches that came out later with significantly better sensors and the ability to conduct ECGs on the spot, so things are already much better, just like you wanted.
Why not ask the summary writer? (Score:2)
Key phrases in the article. Looks more like damning with faint praise. Why only "sometimes"?
Gee, why not ask whoever wrote the summary? Because the article ITSELF has the title:
Stanford study finds Apple Watch can detect irregular heart rhythms
That's not very faint at all, and "sometimes" never appears in the article.
The problem is, whoever added "sometimes" to the summary didn't understand what the 84% was about...
For something that is worn as much as an Apple Watch, it should "nearly always" be able to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Great news, everyone! (Score:1)
And an iPhone can only work with a Macbook...
or windows, or no computer at all....
Re: (Score:3)
And an iPhone can only work with a Macbook...
This is completely and utterly false.
Truth doesn't matter anymore. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You have this exactly backwards. Apple is making this technology available to more people, not fewer.
If you don't like Apple, you can always buy a device from Omron or some other manufacturer. It's way more expensive than an Apple Watch and doesn't do as much. It will do a better job of monitoring your heart though.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're rich, you can better protect yourself!
You started that sentence off accurately, but finished it incorrectly. It should have finished with, “and if you’re not, there’s now something reasonably accurate that you can pick up for cheap!” Apple Watches are only expensive until you compare them to virtually anything in the medical device market. Devices like these make pervasive diagnostics SIGNIFICANTLY more affordable.
This will make me rich (Score:2)
Please download my fake defibrillator app. $12.88.
,
And just in time for April 1st, fake heart condition popup warnings that tell you to go to the closest emergency room immediately, spoofing your GPS connection to make you drive in circles.
Yay technology.
There are very real apps that do help (Score:2)
Probably a great time there are in fact real CPR apps that help [cprcertifi...linehq.com].
One of the apps alerts people nearby that know CPR an event is happening, so you get quicker response.
There are also educational apps that help you learn CPR, better than nothing if you are the only one there. Although I do not know which apps do this, it also seems like CPR apps could help with timing of the presses and breathing assist you are supposed to be doing.
So don't make too light of apps that can help someone having an attack...
Re: Great (Score:1)
Health Insurers will devise MITM interception malware to assure they never sell you coverage.
How can it tell it's undiagnosed? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because it doesn't always produce outward symptoms (Score:1)
That's right, you can have AF and not even know it. As someone who had AF (ablation fixed it, for now...), I found that to be absolutely bizarre. I absolutely knew I was in AF without even taking my pulse, and yet nurses and doctors assured me that there were people who wouldn't know they were in AF.
The fact that the watch can detect this well enough to tell you that you should talk to your doctor about it, is a big deal.
You really, really don't want a stroke.