Early Detection of COVID-19 in Female Athletes Using Wearable Technology.

BACKGROUND: Heart rate variability (HRV), respiratory rate (RR), and resting heart rate (RHR) are common variables measured by wrist-worn activity trackers to monitor health, fitness, and recovery in athletes. Variations in RR are observed in lower-respiratory infections, and preliminary data suggest changes in HRV and RR are linked to early detection of COVID-19 infection in nonathletes. HYPOTHESIS: Wearable technology measuring HRV, RR, RHR, and recovery will be successful for early detection of COVID-19 in NCAA Division I female athletes. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2. METHODS: Female athletes wore WHOOP, Inc. bands through the 2020 to 2021 competitive season. Of the athletes who tested positive for COVID (n = 33), 14 had enough data to be assessed (N = 14; 20.0 ± 1.3 years; 69.8 ± 7.2 kg; 172.0 ± 8.3 cm). Roughly 2 weeks of noninfected days were used to set baseline levels of HRV, RR, recovery, and RHR to compare with -3, -2, and -1 days before a positive COVID-19 result. RESULTS: Increases in RR (P = 0.02) were detected on day -3. RHR (P < 0.01) and RR increased (P < 0.01), while HRV decreased (P < 0.05) on day -1, compared with baseline. Differences were noted in all variables on the day of the positive COVID-19 result: decreased HRV (P < 0.05) and recovery scores (P < 0.01), and increased RHR (P < 0.01) and RR (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: In female athletes, wearable technology was successful in predicting COVID-19 infection through changes in RR 3 days before a positive test, and also HRV and RHR the day before a positive test. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Wearable technology may be used, as part of a multifaceted approach, for the early detection of COVID-19 in elite athletes through monitoring of HRV, RR, and RHR for overall team health.

Fitness band accuracy in older community dwelling adults.

Fitness bands are widely available and assist with tracking the number of steps taken. However, for older people with slow gaits, shorter step widths and/or use of ambulatory devices, the accuracy of fitness bands for step counting has not been well studied. Using four commercially available fitness bands (Garmin Vivofit2™, Fitbit Flex™, Up3™ and Microsoft Band™), we studied 30 older people with varying ambulatory abilities. We videotaped participants walking and compared the videotaped step count with the fitness band counts. Only 5 of the 30 participants had accurate readings within a ±20 percent accuracy for all four bands. There was no relationship between the step speed and accuracy of the fitness bands. Participants using walkers and walking sticks had none of the bands that met the ±20 percent accuracy. Canes were more variable with accuracy. Fitness band manufacturers may need to tune their algorithms for use by older people.