Abstract details
| Abstract-ID: | 1905 |
| Title of the paper: | Validation of smart swim goggles heart rate measurement for swim training monitoring |
| Authors: | Kits, A., Chhatre Elder, N., Eisenhardt, D., Daryoush, Y., Hoskinson, R., Madeleine, P., Samani, A., Kristiansen, M., Clarke, D.C. |
| Institution: | Simon Fraser University |
| Department: | Biomedical Physiology & Kinesiology |
| Country: | Canada |
| Abstract text | INTRODUCTION: Accurately measuring training intensity in swimming is challenging due to a lack of validated measurement devices. Smart swim goggles (FORM goggles, Vancouver, Canada) that harbour a temple-mounted optical heart-rate (HR) sensor enable real-time feedback of HR during training. These HR data facilitate the calculation of HR-based training loads (TL) such as Banister training impulse (bTRIMP) and cumulative TRIMP (cTRIMP) (1). However, the HR measurement from these goggles has yet to be validated. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity of the FORM goggles HR measurements for use in swim training monitoring. METHODS: We applied a criterion validation approach in which the FORM goggles HR measurements were compared to those from a gold-standard electrocardiogram chest-strap (Garmin HRM-Swim). Twenty-five experienced recreational swimmers (proficient in freestyle, backstroke, and breaststroke) completed one of two workouts, with two participants completing both. The workouts differed in intensity and distance. Comparisons were made at four levels: individual heartbeat, interval, main-set, and workout. At each level, the average (HRmean), maximum (HRmax), and minimum (HRmin) HR were assessed using Lin’s concordance correlation, Bland-Altman, and regression. The analysis of cTRIMP and bTRIMP was performed at the interval and workout levels, respectively. Statistics are presented as ranges across all levels. RESULTS: HRmean from the FORM goggles and Garmin HRM-Swim were similar in both workouts, with respective mean±SD values of 131.1±16.4 bpm and 131.1±17.3 bpm (Workout 1), and 142.3±17.0 bpm and 141.8±17.7 bpm (Workout 2). HRmean, HRmax, and HRmin correlation ranged from 0.90-1.0, 0.87-0.92, and 0.59-0.90, respectively, while the TRIMPs correlation was 1.0. The fixed bias (limits of agreement) ranged from -0.34 to 0.11 (3.6-9.5) bpm, -0.11 to 2.6 (8.9-12.0) bpm, and -0.6 to 1.2 (10.1-26.9) bpm for HRmean, HRmax, and HRmin, respectively, and from -0.38 to -0.20 (4.3-4.6) arbitrary units (a.u.) for the TRIMPs. Proportional bias was observed for HRmean (individual heartbeat, interval, and workout levels), and for HRmax (interval level). Regression intercepts from the differences between devices showed no statistically significant difference from zero: HRmean (-0.20 to -0.05 bpm), HRmax (-0.25 to 2.1 bpm), HRmin (-0.66 to 0.89 bpm), and TRIMPs (-0.43 to -0.29 a.u.). CONCLUSION: This study revealed strong agreement between the FORM goggles and Garmin HRM-Swim for HR measurements, particularly for HRmean and TRIMP values. Given that HRmean serves as the primary input for HR-based TL metrics, the goggles provide valid data for monitoring swim training. Larger discrepancies between devices were noted for HRmin and HRmax. Further research should explore the impact of these observed discrepancies on adhering to HR intensity zones during training when utilizing real-time HR feedback. 1. García-Ramos et al., Eur J Sport Sci., 2015. |
| Topic: | Sport Technology |
| Keyword I: | |
| Keyword II: | |
| Keyword III: | |