Workload associated with manual assessment of vital signs as compared with continuous wireless monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Vital sign monitoring is considered an essential aspect of clinical care in hospitals. In general wards, this relies on intermittent manual assessments performed by clinical staff at intervals of up to 12 h. In recent years, continuous monitoring of vital signs has been introduced to the clinic, with improved patient outcomes being one of several potential benefits. The aim of this study was to determine the workload difference between continuous monitoring and manual monitoring of vital signs as part of the National Early Warning Score (NEWS). METHODS: Three wireless sensors continuously monitored blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, and peripheral oxygen saturation in 20 patients admitted to the general hospital ward. The duration needed for equipment set-up and maintenance for continuous monitoring in a 24-h period was recorded and compared with the time spent on manual assessments and documentation of vital signs performed by clinical staff according to the NEWS. RESULTS: The time used for continuous monitoring was 6.0 (IQR 3.2; 7.2) min per patient per day vs. 14 (9.7; 32) min per patient per day for the NEWS. Median difference in duration for monitoring of vital signs was 9.9 (95% CI 5.6; 21) min per patient per day between NEWS and continuous monitoring (p < .001). Time used for continuous monitoring in isolated patients was 6.6 (4.6; 12) min per patient per day as compared with 22 (9.7; 94) min per patient per day for NEWS. CONCLUSION: The use of continuous monitoring was associated with a significant reduction in workload in terms of time for monitoring as compared with manual assessment of vital signs.

Deviations in continuously monitored electrodermal activity before severe clinical complications: a clinical prospective observational explorative cohort study.

Monitoring of high-risk patients in hospital wards is crucial in identifying and preventing clinical deterioration. Sympathetic nervous system activity measured continuously and non-invasively by Electrodermal activity (EDA) may relate to complications, but the clinical use remains untested. The aim of this study was to explore associations between deviations of EDA and subsequent serious adverse events (SAE). Patients admitted to general wards after major abdominal cancer surgery or with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were continuously EDA-monitored for up to 5 days. We used time-perspectives consisting of 1, 3, 6, and 12 h of data prior to first SAE or from start of monitoring. We constructed 648 different EDA-derived features to assess EDA. The primary outcome was any SAE and secondary outcomes were respiratory, infectious, and cardiovascular SAEs. Associations were evaluated using logistic regressions with adjustment for relevant confounders. We included 714 patients and found a total of 192 statistically significant associations between EDA-derived features and clinical outcomes. 79% of these associations were EDA-derived features of absolute and relative increases in EDA and 14% were EDA-derived features with normalized EDA above a threshold. The highest F1-scores for primary outcome with the four time-perspectives were 20.7-32.8%, with precision ranging 34.9-38.6%, recall 14.7-29.4%, and specificity 83.1-91.4%. We identified statistically significant associations between specific deviations of EDA and subsequent SAE, and patterns of EDA may be developed to be considered indicators of upcoming clinical deterioration in high-risk patients.

Continuous monitoring is superior to manual measurements in detecting vital sign deviations in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Patients admitted to the emergency care setting with COVID-19-infection can suffer from sudden clinical deterioration, but the extent of deviating vital signs in this group is still unclear. Wireless technology monitors patient vital signs continuously and might detect deviations earlier than intermittent measurements. The aim of this study was to determine frequency and duration of vital sign deviations using continuous monitoring compared to manual measurements. A secondary analysis was to compare deviations in patients admitted to ICU or having fatal outcome vs. those that were not. METHODS: Two wireless sensors continuously monitored (CM) respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), and peripheral arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2 ). Frequency and duration of vital sign deviations were compared with point measurements performed by clinical staff according to regional guidelines, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS). RESULTS: SpO2 < 92% for more than 60 min was detected in 92% of the patients with CM vs. 40% with NEWS (p < .00001). RR > 24 breaths per minute for more than 5 min were detected in 70% with CM vs. 33% using NEWS (p = .0001). HR ≥ 111 for more than 60 min was seen in 51% with CM and 22% with NEWS (p = .0002). Patients admitted to ICU or having fatal outcome had longer durations of RR > 24 brpm (p = .01), RR > 21 brpm (p = .01), SpO2 < 80% (p = .01), and SpO2 < 85% (p = .02) compared to patients that were not. CONCLUSION: Episodes of desaturation and tachypnea in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection are common and often not detected by routine measurements.

Agreement between wireless and standard measurements of vital signs in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a clinical validation study.

Objective.Wireless sensors for continuous monitoring of vital signs have potential to improve patient care by earlier detection of deterioration in general ward patients. We aimed to assess agreement between wireless and standard (wired) monitoring devices in patients hospitalized with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD).Approach.Paired measurements of vital signs were recorded with 15 min intervals for two hours. The primary outcome was agreement between wireless and standard monitor measurements using the Bland and Altman method to calculate bias with 95% limits of agreement (LoA). We considered LoA of less than ±5 beats min-1(bpm) acceptable for heart rate (HR), whereas agreement of peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), respiratory rate (RR), and blood pressure (BP) were acceptable if within ±3%-points, ±3 breaths min-1(brpm), and ±10 mmHg, respectively.Main results.180 sample-pairs of vital signs from 20 with AECOPD patients were recorded for comparison. The wireless versus standard monitor bias was 0.03 (LoA -3.2 to 3.3) bpm for HR measurements, 1.4% (LoA -0.7% to 3.6%) for SpO2, -7.8 (LoA -22.3 to 6.8) mmHg for systolic BP and -6.2 (LoA -16.8 to 4.5) mmHg for diastolic BP. The wireless versus standard monitor bias for RR measurements was 0.75 (LoA -6.1 to 7.6) brpm.Significance.Commercially available wireless monitors could accurately measure HR in patients admitted with AECOPD compared to standard wired monitoring. Agreement for SpO2were borderline acceptable while agreement for RR and BP should be interpreted with caution.