Reliability of wireless monitoring using a wearable patch sensor in high-risk surgical patients at a step-down unit in the Netherlands: a clinical validation study. Issue 2 (27th February 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Breteler, Martine J M; Huizinga, Erik; van Loon, Kim; Leenen, Luke P H; Dohmen, Daan A J; Kalkman, Cor J; Blokhuis, Taco J
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 8:Issue 2(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-02-27
• Subjects: telemedicine -- vital signs -- wireless technology -- remote monitoring -- continuous monitoring; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020162
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Background and objectives: Intermittent vital signs measurements are the current standard on hospital wards, typically recorded once every 8 hours. Early signs of deterioration may therefore be missed. Recent innovations have resulted in 'wearable' sensors, which may capture patient deterioration at an earlier stage. The objective of this study was to determine whether a wireless 'patch' sensor is able to reliably measure respiratory and heart rate continuously in high-risk surgical patients. The secondary objective was to explore the potential of the wireless sensor to serve as a safety monitor. Design: In an observational methods comparisons study, patients were measured with both the wireless sensor and bedside routine standard for at least 24 hours. Setting: University teaching hospital, single centre. Participants: Twenty-five postoperative surgical patients admitted to a step-down unit. Outcome measures: Primary outcome measures were limits of agreement and bias of heart rate and respiratory rate. Secondary outcome measures were sensor reliability, defined as time until first occurrence of data loss. Results: 1568 hours of vital signs data were analysed. Bias and 95% limits of agreement for heart rate were −1.1 (−8.8 to 6.5) beats per minute. For respiration rate, bias was −2.3 breaths per minute with wide limits of agreement (−15.8 to 11.2 breaths per minute). Median filtering over a 15 min period improved limits of agreement of both respiration and heart rate. 63% of the measurements were performed without data loss greater than 2 min. Overall data loss was limited (6% of time). Conclusions: The wireless sensor is capable of accurately measuring heart rate, but accuracy for respiratory rate was outside acceptable limits. Remote monitoring has the potential to contribute to early recognition of physiological decline in high-risk patients. Future studies should focus on the ability to detect patient deterioration on low care environments and at home after discharge.