Connected Health Technology for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Management

  • Shannon Wongvibulsin
  • Seth S. Martin
  • Steven R. Steinhubl
  • Evan D. MuseEmail author
State-of-the-Art Informatics (J Singh, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on State-of-the-Art Informatics


Purpose of the review

Advances in computing power and wireless technologies have reshaped our approach to patient monitoring. Medical grade sensors and apps that were once restricted to hospitals and specialized clinic are now widely available. Here, we review the current evidence supporting the use of connected health technologies for the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in an effort to highlight gaps and future opportunities for innovation.

Recent findings

Initial studies in connected health for cardiovascular disease prevention and management focused primarily on activity tracking and blood pressure monitoring but have since expanded to include a full panoply of novel sensors and pioneering smartphone apps with targeted interventions in diet, lipid management and risk assessment, smoking cessation, cardiac rehabilitation, heart failure, and arrhythmias. While outfitting patients with sensors and devices alone is infrequently a lasting solution, monitoring programs that include personalized insights based on patient-level data are more likely to lead to improved outcomes. Advances in this space have been driven by patients and researchers while healthcare systems remain slow to fully integrate and adequately adapt these new technologies into their workflows.


Cardiovascular disease prevention and management continue to be key focus areas for clinicians and researchers in the connected health space. Exciting progress has been made though studies continue to suffer from small sample size and limited follow-up. Efforts that combine home patient monitoring, engagement, and personalized feedback are the most promising. Ultimately, combining patient-level ambulatory sensor data, electronic health records, and genomics using machine learning analytics will bring precision medicine closer to reality.


Mobile health Digital medicine Innovation 


Funding information

Shannon Wongvibulsin is supported by the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Medical Scientist Training Program (National Institutes of Health: Institutional Predoctoral Training Grant - T32), National Institutes of Health: Ruth L. Kirschstein Individual Predoctoral NRSA for MD/PhD: F30 Training Grant, and the Johns Hopkins Individualized Health (inHealth) Initiative. Evan D. Muse and Steven R. Steinhubl are supported by the NCATS/NIH of The Scripps Research Institute (UL1TR002550).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Shannon Wongvibulsin, Steven R. Steinhubl, and Evan D. Muse each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Seth S. Martin serves on the scientific advisory boards of Amgen, Sanofi, Regeneron, Esperion, Novo Nordisk, Quest Diagnostics, and Akcea Therapeutics and reports grants from Apple, Google, iHealth, Nokia, Maryland Innovation Initiative, American Heart Association, Aetna Foundation, P J Schafer Memorial Fund, and David and June Trone Family Foundation. Dr. Martin reports a patent pending filed by Johns Hopkins as a co-inventor for a method of LDL-C estimation. Dr. Martin is a founder of and holds equity in Corrie Health, which intends to further develop the platform. This arrangement has been reviewed and approved by the Johns Hopkins University in accordance with its conflict of interest policies.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Benjamin EJ, Virani SS, Callaway CW, Chamberlain AM, Chang AR, Cheng S, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics—2018 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2018;137(12).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mokdad AH, Ballestros K, Echko M, Glenn S, Olsen HE, Mullany E, et al. The state of US health, 1990-2016. JAMA. 2018;319(14):1444–72.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yusuf S, Hawken S, Ôunpuu S, Dans T, Avezum A, Lanas F, et al. Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): case-control study. Lancet. 2004;364(9438):937–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gambhir SS, Ge TJ, Vermesh O, Spitler R. Toward achieving precision health. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10(430):eaao3612.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    • Byambasuren O, Sanders S, Beller E, Glasziou P. Prescribable mHealth apps identified from an overview of systematic reviews. NPJ Digit Med. 2018;1(1):12 In an effort to identify “prescribable” health apps, this evaluation of systematic reviews illustrates the current gaps in evidence from high quality clinical studies.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    • Noah B, Keller MS, Mosadeghi S, Stein L, Johl S, Delshad S, et al. Impact of remote patient monitoring on clinical outcomes: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Npj Digit Med. 2018;1(1):20172 Updated meta-analysis of clinical trials assessing wearable sensors highlighting the importance of behavior change and coaching for targeted interventions.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Senecal C, Widmer RJ, Johnson MP, Lerman LO, Lerman A. Digital health intervention as an adjunct to a workplace health program in hypertension. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2018;12(10):695–702.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mclean G, Band R, Saunderson K, Hanlon P, Murray E, Little P, et al. Digital interventions to promote self-management in adults with hypertension systematic review and meta-analysis. 2016.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lakshminarayan K, Westberg S, Northuis C, Fuller CC, Ikramuddin F, Ezzeddine M, et al. A mHealth-based care model for improving hypertension control in stroke survivors: pilot RCT. Contemp Clin Trials. 2018;70:24–34.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Green BB, Cook AJ, Ralston JD, Fishman PA, Catz SL, Carlson J, et al. Effectiveness of home blood pressure monitoring, web communication, and pharmacist care on hypertension control. JAMA. 2008;299(24):2857.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bosworth HB, Powers BJ, Olsen MK, McCant F, Grubber J, Smith V, et al. Home blood pressure management and improved blood pressure control. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(13):1173.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    • Morawski K, Ghazinouri R, Krumme A, Lauffenburger JC, Lu Z, Durfee E, et al. Association of a smartphone application with medication adherence and blood pressure control. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(6):802 In this study, individuals with hypertension received home blood pressure monitors and were randomized to the use of a novel smartphone application to promote mediation adherence. Despite these interventions, no improvement in blood pressure was achieved.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Steinhubl SR, Muse ED, Barrett PM, Topol EJ. Off the cuff: rebooting blood pressure treatment. Lancet (London, England). 2016;388(10046):749.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tucker KL, Sheppard JP, Stevens R, Bosworth HB, Bove A, Bray EP, et al. Self-monitoring of blood pressure in hypertension: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. Rahimi K, editor. PLOS Med. 2017;14(9):e1002389.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    • McManus RJ, Mant J, Franssen M, Nickless A, Schwartz C, Hodgkinson J, et al. Efficacy of self-monitored blood pressure, with or without telemonitoring, for titration of antihypertensive medication (TASMINH4): an unmasked randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2018;391(10124):949–59 Pivotal trial for home blood pressure monitoring illustrating benefits over traditional (clinical) blood pressure monitoring in the ambulatory setting.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Margolis KL, Asche SE, Dehmer SP, Bergdall AR, Green BB, Sperl-Hillen JM, et al. Long-term outcomes of the effects of home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist management on blood pressure among adults with uncontrolled hypertension. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(5):e181617.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bradbury K, Morton K, Band R, van Woezik A, Grist R, McManus RJ, et al. Using the Person-Based Approach to optimise a digital intervention for the management of hypertension. Aslani P, editor. PLoS One. 2018;13(5):e0196868.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chandrasekhar A, Kim C-S, Naji M, Natarajan K, Hahn J-O, Mukkamala R. Smartphone-based blood pressure monitoring via the oscillometric finger-pressing method. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10(431):eaap8674.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Plante TB, Urrea B, MacFarlane ZT, Blumenthal RS, Miller ER, Appel LJ, et al. Validation of the instant blood pressure smartphone app. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(5):700–2.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pandya A, Asch DA, Volpp KG, Sy S, Troxel AB, Zhu J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of financial incentives for patients and physicians to manage low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(5):e182008.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Näslund U, Ng N, Lundgren A, Fhärm E, Grönlund C, Johansson H, et al. Visualization of asymptomatic atherosclerotic disease for optimum cardiovascular prevention (VIPVIZA): a pragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2018;393(10167):133–42.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Asch DA, Troxel AB, Stewart WF, Sequist TD, Jones JB, Hirsch AG, et al. Effect of financial incentives to physicians, patients, or both on lipid levels. JAMA. 2015;314(18):1926–35.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Khera AV, Emdin CA, Drake I, Natarajan P, Bick AG, Cook NR, et al. Genetic risk, adherence to a healthy lifestyle, and coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(24):2349–58.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Muse ED, Torkamani A, Topol EJ. When genomics goes digital. Lancet (London, England). 2018;391(10138):2405.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Khera AV, Chaffin M, Aragam KG, Haas ME, Roselli C, Choi SH, et al. Genome-wide polygenic scores for common diseases identify individuals with risk equivalent to monogenic mutations. Nat Genet. 2018;50(9):1219–24.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Torkamani A, Wineinger NE, Topol EJ. The personal and clinical utility of polygenic risk scores. Nat Rev Genet. 2018;19(9):581–90.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, Bull FC. Worldwide trends in insufficient physical activity from 2001 to 2016: a pooled analysis of 358 population-based surveys with 1·9 million participants. Lancet Glob Heal. 2018;6(10):e1077–86.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lee I-M, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, Puska P, Blair SN, Katzmarzyk PT, et al. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet (London, England). 2012;380(9838):219–29.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Franklin NC. Technology to promote and increase physical activity in heart failure. Heart Fail Clin. 2015;11(1):173–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Murray CJL, Abraham J, Ali MK, Alvarado M, Atkinson C, Baddour LM, et al. The state of US health, 1990-2010. JAMA. 2013;310(6):591–608.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Martin SS, Feldman DI, Blumenthal RS, Jones SR, Post WS, McKibben RA, et al. mActive: a randomized clinical trial of an automated mHealth intervention for physical activity promotion. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4(11).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Compernolle S, Vandelanotte C, Cardon G, De Bourdeaudhuij I, De Cocker K. Effectiveness of a web-based, computer-tailored, pedometer-based physical activity intervention for adults: a cluster randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(2):e38.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    • Finkelstein EA, Haaland BA, Bilger M, Sahasranaman A, Sloan RA, Nang EEK, et al. Effectiveness of activity trackers with and without incentives to increase physical activity (TRIPPA): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4(12):983–95 A large-scale evaluation of the use of positive incentive strategies (cash or charitable donations) to increase physical activity. Despite improvements in activity with either incentive, there were no changes in health outcomes.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Urrea B, Misra S, Plante TB, Kelli HM, Misra S, Blaha MJ, et al. Mobile health initiatives to improve outcomes in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2015;17(12):59.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Conroy DE, Yang C-H, Maher JP. Behavior change techniques in top-ranked mobile apps for physical activity. Am J Prev Med. 2014;46(6):649–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Phillips SM, Cadmus-Bertram L, Rosenberg D, Buman MP, Lynch BM. Wearable technology and physical activity in chronic disease: opportunities and challenges. Am J Prev Med. 2018;54(1):144–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    • Chokshi NP, Adusumalli S, Small DS, Morris A, Feingold J, Ha YP, et al. Loss-framed financial incentives and personalized goal-setting to increase physical activity among ischemic heart disease patients using wearable devices: the ACTIVE REWARD randomized trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(12). In a CV high-risk cohort, this study investigated loss-framed incentives (in contrast to TRIPPA which used positive incentives) to promote healthy behaviors.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lim WK, Davila S, Teo JX, Yang C, Pua CJ, Blöcker C, et al. Beyond fitness tracking: The use of consumer-grade wearable data from normal volunteers in cardiovascular and lipidomics research. Kirkwood T, editor. PLOS Biol. 2018;16(2):e2004285.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Burke LE, Ma J, Azar KMJ, Bennett GG, Peterson ED, Zheng Y, et al. Current science on consumer use of mobile health for cardiovascular disease prevention. Circulation. 2015;132(12):1157–213.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Martin CK, Miller AC, Thomas DM, Champagne CM, Han H, Church T. Efficacy of SmartLoss SM , a smartphone-based weight loss intervention: results from a randomized controlled trial. Obesity. 2015;23(5):935–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Dunford E, Trevena H, Goodsell C, Ng KH, Webster J, Millis A, et al. FoodSwitch: a mobile phone app to enable consumers to make healthier food choices and crowdsourcing of National Food Composition Data. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2014;2(3):e37.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Turner-McGrievy GM, Helander EE, Kaipainen K, Perez-Macias JM, Korhonen I. The use of crowdsourcing for dietary self-monitoring: crowdsourced ratings of food pictures are comparable to ratings by trained observers. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;22(e1):e112–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhang W, Yu Q, Siddiquie B, Divakaran A, Sawhney H. Snap-n-Eat. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015;9(3):525–33.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    O’Sullivan A, Henrick B, Dixon B, Barile D, Zivkovic A, Smilowitz J, et al. 21st century toolkit for optimizing population health through precision nutrition. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2017 Jul;5:1–12.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bashiardes S, Godneva A, Elinav E. Towards utilization of the human genome and microbiome for personalized nutrition. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2018;51:57–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Spohr SA, Nandy R, Gandhiraj D, Vemulapalli A, Anne S, Walters ST. Efficacy of SMS text message interventions for smoking cessation: a meta-analysis. J Subst Abus Treat. 2015;56:1–10.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Abroms LC, Boal AL, Simmens SJ, Mendel JA, Windsor RA. A randomized trial of Text2Quit. Am J Prev Med. 2014 Sep;47(3):242–50.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    • Liao Y, Wu Q, Kelly BC, Zhang F, Tang Y-Y, Wang Q, et al. Effectiveness of a text-messaging-based smoking cessation intervention (“Happy Quit”) for smoking cessation in China: a randomized controlled trial. Degenhardt L, editor. PLOS Med. 2018;15(12):e1002713 This study, done exclusively in China, showed clinical efficacy of a cognitive behavioral therapy based text-messaging approach for smoking cessation.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    BinDhim NF, McGeechan K, Trevena L. Who uses smoking cessation apps? A feasibility study across three countries via smartphones. JMIR mhealth uhealth. 2014;2(1):e4.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Vidrine DJ, Frank-Pearce SG, Vidrine JI, Tahay PD, Marani SK, Chen S, et al. Efficacy of mobile phone–delivered smoking cessation interventions for socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals. JAMA Intern Med. 2018.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Struik LL, Baskerville NB. The role of Facebook in crush the crave, a mobile- and social media-based smoking cessation intervention: qualitative framework analysis of posts. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(7):e170.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Naughton F. Delivering “just-in-time” smoking cessation support via mobile phones: current knowledge and future directions: table 1. Nicotine Tob Res. 2016;19(3):ntw143.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Halpern SD, Harhay MO, Saulsgiver K, Brophy C, Troxel AB, Volpp KG. A pragmatic trial of e-cigarettes, incentives, and drugs for smoking cessation. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(24):2302–10.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Dalal HM, Doherty P, Taylor RS. Cardiac rehabilitation. BMJ. 2015;351:h5000.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Varnfield M, Karunanithi M, Lee C-K, Honeyman E, Arnold D, Ding H, et al. Smartphone-based home care model improved use of cardiac rehabilitation in postmyocardial infarction patients: results from a randomised controlled trial. Heart. 2014;100(22):1770–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Lear SA. The delivery of cardiac rehabilitation using communications technologies: the “virtual” cardiac rehabilitation program. Can J Cardiol. 2018;34(10):S278–83.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Classick-Wallace MA, Bockol F, Blaber R. Feasibility of a smartphone-delivered, hybrid cardiac rehabilitation program. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2017;37(5):363–85.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Gordon NF, Salmon RD, Wright BS, Faircloth GC, Reid KS, Gordon TL. Clinical effectiveness of lifestyle health coaching: case study of an evidence-based program. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2017;11(2):153–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Marvel FA, Wang J, Martin SS. Digital health innovation: a toolkit to navigate from concept to clinical testing. JMIR Cardio. 2018;2(1):e2.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    • Volpp KG, Troxel AB, Mehta SJ, Norton L, Zhu J, Lim R, et al. Effect of electronic reminders, financial incentives, and social support on outcomes after myocardial infarction. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(8):1093 An inventive study that utilized a combination approach consisting of financial incentives, electronic pill bottles, and social support to promote medication adherence, yet resulting in no significant improvements. Highlights the complex issues regarding behavior change.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    McDermott MM, Spring B, Berger JS, Treat-Jacobson D, Conte MS, Creager MA, et al. Effect of a home-based exercise intervention of wearable technology and telephone coaching on walking performance in peripheral artery disease. JAMA. 2018;319(16):1665–76.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lee WC, Chavez YE, Baker T, Luce BR. Economic burden of heart failure: a summary of recent literature. Heart Lung. 33(6):362–71.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Del Gobbo LC, Kalantarian S, Imamura F, Lemaitre R, Siscovick DS, Psaty BM, et al. Contribution of major lifestyle risk factors for incident heart failure in older adults. JACC Hear Fail. 2015;3(7):520–8.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Honeyman E, Ding H, Varnfield M, Karunanithi M. Mobile health applications in cardiac care. Interv Cardiol. 2014;6(2):227–40.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Koehler F, Winkler S, Schieber M, Sechtem U, Stangl K, Böhm M, et al. Telemedicine in heart failure: pre-specified and exploratory subgroup analyses from the TIM-HF trial. Int J Cardiol. 2012;161(3):143–50.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Talmor G, Nguyen B, Keibel A, Temelkovska T, Saxon L. Use of software applications to improve medication adherence and achieve more integrated disease management in heart failure. Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2018;28(7):483–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Athilingam P, Jenkins B. Mobile phone apps to support heart failure self-care management: integrative review. JMIR Cardiol. 2018;2(1):e10057.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Alnosayan N, Chatterjee S, Alluhaidan A, Lee E, Houston FL. Design and usability of a heart failure mHealth system: a pilot study. JMIR Hum Factors. 2017;4(1):e9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    De La I, Díez T, Garcia-Zapirain B, Méndez-Zorrilla A, López-Coronado M. Monitoring and follow-up of chronic heart failure: a literature review of eHealth applications and systems.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Abraham WT, Adamson PB, Bourge RC, Aaron MF, Costanzo MR, Stevenson LW, et al. Wireless pulmonary artery haemodynamic monitoring in chronic heart failure: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011;377(9766):658–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Pereira VFA, Valentin LSS. The MentalPlus® digital game might be an accessible open source tool to evaluate cognitive dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in hypertensive patients: a pilot exploratory study. Int J Hypertens. 2018;2018.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    • Koehler F, Koehler K, Deckwart O, Prescher S, Wegscheider K, Kirwan B-A, et al. Efficacy of telemedical interventional management in patients with heart failure (TIM-HF2): a randomised, controlled, parallel-group, unmasked trial. Lancet (London, England). 2018;392(10152):1047–57 This study combined home telemonitoring sensor technologies (BP, bodyweight, heart rate and rhythm, SpO2) with tailored, patient-specific interventions that resulted in a reduction of days lost due to CV hospitalizations and all-cause mortality.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Support-hf, Investigators, Committees. Home monitoring with IT-supported specialist management versus home monitoring alone in patients with heart failure: design and baseline results of the SUPPORT-HF 2 randomized trial SUPPORT-HF 2 Investigators and Committees 1 Trial Designs. 2018.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Cajita MI, Gleason KT, Han H-R. A systematic review of mHealth-based heart failure interventions. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2016;31(3):E10–22.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Lau DH, Nattel S, Kalman JM, Sanders P. Modifiable risk factors and atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2017;136(6):583–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Turakhia MP, Kaiser DW. Transforming the care of atrial fibrillation with mobile health. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2016;47(1):45–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    McConnell MV, Turakhia MP, Harrington RA, King AC, Ashley EA. Mobile health advances in physical activity, fitness, and atrial fibrillation: moving hearts. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(23):2691–701.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Kotecha D, Chua WWL, Fabritz L, Hendriks J, Casadei B, Schotten U, et al. European Society of Cardiology smartphone and tablet applications for patients with atrial fibrillation and their health care providers. EP Eur. 2018;20(2):225–33.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Steinberg JS, Varma N, Cygankiewicz I, Aziz P, Balsam P, Baranchuk A, et al. 2017 ISHNE-HRS expert consensus statement on ambulatory ECG and external cardiac monitoring/telemetry. Hear Rhythm. 2017;14(7):e55–96.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    McManus DD, Chong JW, Soni A, Saczynski JS, Esa N, Napolitano C, et al. PULSE-SMART: Pulse-based arrhythmia discrimination using a novel smartphone application. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016;27(1):51–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Golzar M, Fotouhi-Ghazvini F, Rabbani H, Zakeri FS. Mobile cardiac health-care monitoring and notification with real time tachycardia and bradycardia arrhythmia detection. J Med Signals Sens. 7(4):193–202.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    McManus DD, Lee J, Maitas O, Esa N, Pidikiti R, Carlucci A, et al. A novel application for the detection of an irregular pulse using an iPhone 4S in patients with atrial fibrillation. Hear Rhythm. 2013;10(3):315–9.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Chan P, Wong C, Poh YC, Pun L, Leung WW, Wong Y, et al. Diagnostic performance of a smartphone-based photoplethysmographic application for atrial fibrillation screening in a primary care setting. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(7).Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Haberman ZC, Jahn RT, Bose R, Tun H, Shinbane JS, Doshi RN, et al. Wireless smartphone ECG enables large-scale screening in diverse populations. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2015;26(5):520–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    William AD, Kanbour M, Callahan T, Bhargava M, Varma N, Rickard J, et al. Assessing the accuracy of an automated atrial fibrillation detection algorithm using smartphone technology: the iREAD study. Hear Rhythm. 2018;15(10):1561–5.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Halcox JPJ, Wareham K, Cardew A, Gilmore M, Barry JP, Phillips C, et al. Assessment of remote heart rhythm sampling using the AliveCor heart monitor to screen for atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2017;136(19):1784–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Bumgarner JM, Lambert CT, Hussein AA, Cantillon DJ, Baranowski B, Wolski K, et al. Smartwatch algorithm for automated detection of atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(21):2381–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    • Steinhubl SR, Waalen J, Edwards AM, Ariniello LM, Mehta RR, Ebner GS, et al. Effect of a home-based wearable continuous ECG monitoring patch on detection of undiagnosed atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 2018;320(2):146 While this study reported a creative screening strategy for individuals at high risk of atrial fibrillation, a key aspect here is the complete digitization of the clinical trial operations from start to finish.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Gussak I, Vukajlovic D, Vukcevic V, George S, Bojovic B, Hadzievski L, et al. Wireless remote monitoring of reconstructed 12-lead ECGs after ablation for atrial fibrillation using a hand-held device. J Electrocardiol. 2012;45(2):129–35.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Sankari Z, Adeli H. HeartSaver: a mobile cardiac monitoring system for auto-detection of atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, and atrio-ventricular block. Comput Biol Med. 2011;41(4):211–20.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Turakhia MP. Moving from big data to deep learning—the case of atrial fibrillation. JAMA Cardiol. 2018;3(5):371–2.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    • Tison GH, Sanchez JM, Ballinger B, Singh A, Olgin JE, Pletcher MJ, et al. Passive detection of atrial fibrillation using a commercially available smartwatch. JAMA Cardiol. 2018;3(5):409 This was one of the first studies to combine a smartwatch assessment of cardiac rhythm with deep-learning analytics illustrating the challenges of rhythm prediction in an ambulatory setting.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Apple Heart Study: assessment of wristwatch-based photoplethysmography to identify cardiac arrhythmias - full text view - [cited 2018 Dec 14]. Available from:
  95. 95.
    Attia ZI, Kapa S, Lopez-Jimenez F, McKie PM, Ladewig DJ, Satam G, et al. Screening for cardiac contractile dysfunction using an artificial intelligence–enabled electrocardiogram. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):70–4.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Poh M-Z, Poh YC, Chan P-H, Wong C-K, Pun L, Leung WW-C, et al. Diagnostic assessment of a deep learning system for detecting atrial fibrillation in pulse waveforms. Heart. 2018;104(23):1921–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Li X, Dunn J, Salins D, Zhou G, Zhou W, Schüssler-Fiorenza Rose SM, et al. Digital health: tracking physiomes and activity using wearable biosensors reveals useful health-related information. Kirkwood T, editor. PLOS Biol. 2017;15(1):e2001402.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Chung HU, Kim BH, Lee JY, Lee J, Xie Z, Ibler EM, et al. Binodal, wireless epidermal electronic systems with in-sensor analytics for neonatal intensive care. Science. 2019;363(6430):eaau0780.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Huang Z, Hao Y, Li Y, Hu H, Wang C, Nomoto A, et al. Three-dimensional integrated stretchable electronics. Nat Electron. 2018 Aug 13;1(8):473–80.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Kim J, Campbell AS, de Ávila BE-F, Wang J. Wearable biosensors for healthcare monitoring. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shannon Wongvibulsin
    • 1
  • Seth S. Martin
    • 2
  • Steven R. Steinhubl
    • 3
  • Evan D. Muse
    • 3
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringJohns Hopkins University, Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Division of Cardiology, Department of MedicineJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Scripps Research Translational InstituteSan DiegoUSA
  4. 4.Division of Cardiovascular DiseaseScripps Clinic-Scripps HealthSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations