Feasibility of remote digital monitoring using wireless Bluetooth monitors, the Smart Angel™ app and an original web platform for patients following outpatient surgery: a prospective observational pilot study.
Ambulatory surgery
Device
Remote monitoring
Usability
Journal
BMC anesthesiology
ISSN: 1471-2253
Titre abrégé: BMC Anesthesiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968535
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 10 2020
08 10 2020
Historique:
received:
11
06
2020
accepted:
29
09
2020
entrez:
9
10
2020
pubmed:
10
10
2020
medline:
14
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Remote monitoring of mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) or oxygen saturation (SpO Adults scheduled for elective outpatient surgery were prospectively enrolled. In the first 5 postoperative days, patients completed a self-report questionnaire (pain, comfort, nausea, vomiting) and recorded SpO From May 2018 to September 2018, data were available for 29 out of 30 patients enrolled (1 patient was not discharged from hospital after surgery). The remote monitoring technology recorded 2038 data items (62%) compared with 2656 (82%) items recorded on the paper form (p = 0.001). The most common errors with the remote technology were software malfunctioning when starting the MAP monitor and malfunctioning between the tablet and the Bluetooth monitor. No serious adverse events were noted. The SUS score for the system was 85 (68-93) for 26 patients. This work evaluates the ability of a pilot system for monitoring remote physiological data using digital technology after ambulatory surgery and highlights the digital limitations of this technology. Technological improvements are required to reduce malfunctioning (4G access, transmission between apps). ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03464721 ) (March 8, 2018).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Remote monitoring of mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) or oxygen saturation (SpO
METHODS
Adults scheduled for elective outpatient surgery were prospectively enrolled. In the first 5 postoperative days, patients completed a self-report questionnaire (pain, comfort, nausea, vomiting) and recorded SpO
RESULTS
From May 2018 to September 2018, data were available for 29 out of 30 patients enrolled (1 patient was not discharged from hospital after surgery). The remote monitoring technology recorded 2038 data items (62%) compared with 2656 (82%) items recorded on the paper form (p = 0.001). The most common errors with the remote technology were software malfunctioning when starting the MAP monitor and malfunctioning between the tablet and the Bluetooth monitor. No serious adverse events were noted. The SUS score for the system was 85 (68-93) for 26 patients.
CONCLUSION
This work evaluates the ability of a pilot system for monitoring remote physiological data using digital technology after ambulatory surgery and highlights the digital limitations of this technology. Technological improvements are required to reduce malfunctioning (4G access, transmission between apps).
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03464721 ) (March 8, 2018).
Identifiants
pubmed: 33032541
doi: 10.1186/s12871-020-01178-5
pii: 10.1186/s12871-020-01178-5
pmc: PMC7545846
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03464721']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
259Références
Diabetes Metab. 2019 Sep;45(4):322-329
pubmed: 30243616
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2019 Jun;38(3):223-229
pubmed: 30339892
Anaesth Intensive Care. 2019 May;47(3):242-250
pubmed: 31165620
Can J Anaesth. 2015 Aug;62(8):857-65
pubmed: 26013110
Am J Emerg Med. 2019 Aug;37(8):1527-1530
pubmed: 30904343
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2018 Dec;37(6):607-614
pubmed: 30580775
Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2014 Jan;33(1):8-9
pubmed: 24439497
J Clin Anesth. 2014 May;26(3):191-8
pubmed: 24806076
J Clin Monit Comput. 2017 Aug;31(4):825-831
pubmed: 27170014
Oncology. 2020;98(6):386-395
pubmed: 31336377
Telemed J E Health. 2017 Jan;23(1):3-17
pubmed: 27116181
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013 Nov;139(11):1175-80
pubmed: 24008557
Br J Anaesth. 2019 Mar;122(3):304-306
pubmed: 30770047
Anesth Analg. 2018 Aug;127(2):424-431
pubmed: 29916861
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Sep;213(3):344.e1-7
pubmed: 25981843
Br J Anaesth. 2017 Nov 1;119(5):1030-1038
pubmed: 29077818
Can J Cardiol. 2018 Jul;34(7):850-862
pubmed: 29960614
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2014 Jan-Feb;10(1):101-5
pubmed: 24094869
Acta Orthop. 2015;86(6):667-70
pubmed: 26139431