AFIB, Fitbit, Garmin, ...

mjbnj0001
mjbnj0001 Posts: 1,266 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Advice, please, from those using an HR monitor (Fitbit, Garmin, etc.). I have permanent, generally silent AFIB. I have been dealing with it while cycling, swimming, etc., plus in the gym in previous winters. I carry a fingertip pulse-ox with me for measuring HR when it feels as if it's acting up. I have found the gym equipment doesn't measure erratic heartrates very well (those that do measure, such as stationary cycles), so I've stuck with the fingertip thing. Now I'm starting the new year back more in the gym than outdoor riding (weather/ice dependent).

Any advice on monitors? I feel positively neanderthal using the fingertip thing in the gym. Especially as I take readings in sets of 3/5/7 and average them, depending on how erratic the heartbeat is measured. I'm looking for accuracy (esp when beats are irregular), reliability, weather resistance, etc.

For more background, I am 65yo male, have been diagnosed and treated for some years. Exercise has greatly improved my situation, but, in the case of cycling, hills (extreme effort) will never be my friends. It is in these situations that I need to occasionally pause and let the beats settle down. I've got decent overall endurance.

Slightly different question: anybody have experience with KardiaMobile?

Thanks in advance. Interested in hearing other's experiences.

Replies

  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    Given that you have a medical reason to really want an accurate reading, I highly suggest getting a chest based HR monitor to pair with whatever wrist based device you get. They're simply more accurate. I know Garmin makes one what can be used while swimming (though you'll likely need one of the officially supported devices to use it while swimming). If you aren't using it for swimming, than you're choice of straps is far wider.

    Ray Maker from DCRainmaker does a really good job in terms of comparing devices and their HR accuracy as well.
  • moonangel12
    moonangel12 Posts: 971 Member
    I am not a techie person at all, so I went from a refurbished older model FitBit Charge to a new Garmin Instinct... it seems like there is far less “drag” in the Garmin’s reporting, but that could be the difference in age and technological advances.

    I originally bought my FitBit for the heart rate data, had a couple spells of 130 resting HR and wanted something I could glance at rather than draw any attention by trying to check it on my wrist. (At 35 I haven’t been diagnosed with anything because they haven’t been able to catch it on a monitor, but I know I have a randomly irregular heart beat where I skip beats periodically. My dad’s started out that way and is now full now Afib, ablation, implanted monitor, etc. so I am hoping to be proactive). They just got my father in law one for his Afib. I have also heard a couple stories where people had weird readings, thought it was the tracker being glitchy, but it was truly undiagnosed heart issues that they thankfully found.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    aokoye wrote: »
    Given that you have a medical reason to really want an accurate reading, I highly suggest getting a chest based HR monitor to pair with whatever wrist based device you get. They're simply more accurate. I know Garmin makes one what can be used while swimming (though you'll likely need one of the officially supported devices to use it while swimming). If you aren't using it for swimming, than you're choice of straps is far wider.

    Ray Maker from DCRainmaker does a really good job in terms of comparing devices and their HR accuracy as well.

    This. I wouldn't rely on a fitness tracker for something so medically important. I love my watch, but its HR monitoring is simply not as good as a chest strap.
  • moonangel12
    moonangel12 Posts: 971 Member
    aokoye wrote: »
    Given that you have a medical reason to really want an accurate reading, I highly suggest getting a chest based HR monitor to pair with whatever wrist based device you get. They're simply more accurate. I know Garmin makes one what can be used while swimming (though you'll likely need one of the officially supported devices to use it while swimming). If you aren't using it for swimming, than you're choice of straps is far wider.

    Ray Maker from DCRainmaker does a really good job in terms of comparing devices and their HR accuracy as well.
    Good info!
  • mjbnj0001
    mjbnj0001 Posts: 1,266 Member
    Thanks for feedback so far #aokoye, #moonangel12, #northcascades. Much appreciated. Got some info to think about - the chest strap was something that I didn't think too much about previously.
  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    mjbnj0001 wrote: »
    Slightly different question: anybody have experience with KardiaMobile?

    I forgot about this bit. I have an acquaintance who has AFIB and really really likes KardiaMobile. I'm almost positive that she doesn't use it when she's doing some or maybe most of the cardio heavy sports she does as, a lot of them involve being on the water. That said, she is a very big fan of it.
  • mjbnj0001
    mjbnj0001 Posts: 1,266 Member
    aokoye wrote: »
    mjbnj0001 wrote: »
    Slightly different question: anybody have experience with KardiaMobile?

    I forgot about this bit. I have an acquaintance who has AFIB and really really likes KardiaMobile. I'm almost positive that she doesn't use it when she's doing some or maybe most of the cardio heavy sports she does as, a lot of them involve being on the water. That said, she is a very big fan of it.

    My activities include swimming (pool and ocean), snorkeling and sailing. I no longer scuba dive but that's another issue different from AFIB. Sigh; aging impacts. The Kardia thing seems, from commercials, to be the sort of thing that isn't a wearable, but something you'd place on a surface and then rest your fingers on. A small Pelican box might be useful for transport needs in wet environments.

    Thanks!

Categories