Can wearable technology improve health outcomes without overwhelming healthcare systems or causing other harms? In this blog, YHEC’s CEO, Professor Matthew Taylor, examines the balance between the clinical benefits and the economic costs of wearable technology, using his own life-saving diagnosis as a personal perspective.
The life-saving benefits and risks of wearable technology: a personal reflection
I’ve been a regular runner for several years and in 2021, I bought a smartwatch. I don’t obsess with it, but I’m a geek who likes a graph, so I always liked scrolling through the various charts.
In May 2025, I noticed something strange during my runs. My heart rate would sometimes drop mid-run and stay low. I didn’t think much of it at first (probably a dodgy watch reading). But after it happened a few times in a row, I decided it was worth checking out with my GP. Long story short: a bunch of tests later, and a cardiologist explained that I had a severely leaky aortic valve, which was caused by a congenital condition called a bicuspid aortic valve. Apparently, I was born with it and had never been aware of it until the scan. It would deteriorate over time, and would eventually cause life-threatening complications if left untreated. The recommendation was open heart surgery to replace the valve. Given my relatively young age and preferences, the best option was a mechanical valve.
I had the surgery in July, which thankfully went very well, but the recovery was extremely tough. In the early stages, I experienced episodes of tachycardia (abnormally high heart rate), which led to two cardioversions (a procedure under general anaesthetic where the heart is shocked back into a normal rhythm). It was scary, but the medical team was absolutely incredible. The care I received throughout this entire process was outstanding, and I truly couldn’t have asked for a better experience.
Now, five months later and with wonderful support from my wife, friends and family, I’ve re-started running (albeit tentatively) and feel a lot more like my old self again. But, being a nerdy health economist who loves a graph and a calculation, my experience has got me thinking about the cost effectiveness of wearable technology.
The role of wearable technology in healthcare: a double-edged sword
In my case, my smartwatch could be considered a lifesaver. It flagged a potential problem that might have gone unnoticed until it was too late. My condition could (and probably would) have worsened to a point of no return.
But, as with most technology, there’s a flip side. Wearable technology (including fitness trackers, smartwatches, heart rate monitors, etc.) has become increasingly common in recent years. According to the Statista Global Consumer Survey, in 2023, over 30% of adults in the UK were using some form of wearable tech. A report from Grand View Research estimated that the global market for wearable devices was valued at $84.2 billion in 2024 and is expected to grow by an average of 13.6% every year from 2025 to 2030, to a forecasted $186.14 billion.
But while the benefits of these devices in tracking fitness, sleep, and even heart health are well known, they have potential drawbacks.
The case for diagnostic benefits
Wearables have shown great promise in helping to identify health issues early. For example, studies have shown that wearables can help detect arrhythmias (irregular heart rhythms) and even provide early warnings for conditions like atrial fibrillation. According to a 2025 systematic review published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, the Apple Watch’s ECG feature has been shown to correctly identify atrial fibrillation in 95% of cases. Early detection of arrhythmias can help prevent strokes, heart attacks, and other serious conditions. This could potentially save huge amounts of money, and improve length and quality of life for enormous populations of people.
The data these devices collect can also help doctors monitor patients with chronic conditions, potentially reducing hospital visits. For instance, a 2019 editorial in the Lancet Digital Health suggested that wearable devices could be helpful in managing conditions like obesity and diabetes, allowing patients to better track their progress and adjust treatment plans accordingly. Again, the economic benefits of this could potentially be substantial.
The downside: overuse and overdiagnosis
While the benefits are clear, there are plenty of downsides to wearable technology. As helpful as it can be for detecting irregularities, it can also lead to overuse of healthcare resources, particularly when false positives occur. Studies have shown that unwarranted medical investigations (due to inconclusive or erroneous data from wearables) could be costing the NHS more than £1.3 billion every year, with many individuals undergoing unnecessary testing and procedures as a result of inconclusive or misleading data from their devices. This raises the question of whether we are using wearable tech in a way that is adding value, or just adding worry and expense. To justify such expenditure, we’d need to be generating an extra 52,000 quality-adjusted life years every year, due to the benefits of wearable tech. The watches are great, but I’m not sure that they’re that great. And that’s not counting the cost of the technology itself, nor the potential lost quality of life through unnecessary worry.
Moreover, the fact that wearables are largely unregulated means there are no official guidelines about how healthcare professionals should respond when they encounter irregular data from these devices. Many people may get anxious after seeing abnormal readings and seek medical help. While some cases, like mine, might lead to life-saving interventions, others might result in unnecessary follow-ups that drain resources. Health anxiety is serious as well. Too much self-analysis can lead to poorer quality of life and even lead to negative behavioural changes, as explored in a recent news article. This isn’t very well understood, and more research is needed.
Conclusions: finding balance
So, what do I think? Sadly, I don’t know. If we were going to really try to measure the cost effectiveness, I suspect that we would get very different outcomes for different populations. For example, wearable technology would almost certainly have a better chance of being cost effective when used by people at higher risk of treatable or preventable conditions. For people at low risk or people at risk of untreatable conditions, it would be harder to see the benefits outweighing the downsides.
Wearable technology can absolutely save lives, as it did in my case, but it’s not a perfect system. It’s essential for both users and healthcare providers to understand the limitations of these devices and to approach the data they provide with a certain level of caution.
Here are my recommendations:
- Be aware of the limitations: While wearables can help track important health metrics, they’re not a substitute for professional medical diagnosis. Always consult a healthcare provider if you’re concerned about a reading. That’s not just me covering myself, it’s sensible advice!
- Develop suitable regulation: As wearables become more integrated into healthcare systems, there’s a growing need for clear guidelines on how to interpret the data they collect, especially when it comes to abnormal readings.
- Adapt pathways to cope with overdiagnosis: While wearables can alert us to potential health issues, they can also lead to overdiagnosis and unnecessary medical interventions. Healthcare systems need to adapt and create protocols to manage the increased demand for tests and procedures.
- Improve the nation’s health literacy: Wearables can only offer so much. Educating users about the meaning behind the data and when to seek professional help is critical for ensuring the best outcomes.
Ultimately, wearable technology has the potential to revolutionise healthcare, offering earlier diagnosis, better monitoring, and more personalised care. Twenty years from now, it will have advanced beyond our imagination. But we must make sure that we collect evidence on the aggregated outcomes to make sure that the benefits outweigh the costs. Not just in monetary terms but in overall health and wellbeing metrics too.
Contact us
I’m hoping to explore this further and more formally in the next few months, so please contact me if you’re interested in collaboration or would like to find out more about how we evaluate digital health technologies and other health care.
