Postoperative use of fitness trackers for continuous monitoring of vital signs: a survey of hospitalized patients.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Philipp Helmer, Sebastian Hottenrott, Kathrin Wienböker, Jürgen Brugger, Christian Stoppe, Benedikt Schmid, Peter Kranke, Patrick Meybohm, Michael Sammeth
{"title":"Postoperative use of fitness trackers for continuous monitoring of vital signs: a survey of hospitalized patients.","authors":"Philipp Helmer, Sebastian Hottenrott, Kathrin Wienböker, Jürgen Brugger, Christian Stoppe, Benedikt Schmid, Peter Kranke, Patrick Meybohm, Michael Sammeth","doi":"10.1007/s10877-025-01273-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Wearables and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies are increasingly incorporated into healthcare, including perioperative settings. These devices offer continuous non-invasive monitoring of vital signs, patient position, and mobilization. Nonetheless, there is currently little information about tolerance and acceptance of wearables in postoperative patients. We therefore assessed opinions and user experience in postoperative patients who used three popular fitness trackers during their entire hospital stay. Specifically, we evaluate the Apple Watch 7, Garmin Fenix 6 Pro, and Withings ScanWatch. We used an investigator-designed patient questionnaire with 11 questions to quantify patient experience and opinions regarding inpatient and home monitoring. Secondarily, we evaluated compliance and the incidence of associated adverse events during daily patient visits. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests. The majority of the answers to the questions (82.1%) were rated positively defined as Likert-Scale Scores 4 or 5 by the 33 analyzed patients, ranging between 72.7 and 97.0% agreement rate. Specific questions related to data sharing for research and overall user experience received high agreement rates (97.0 and 84.8%, respectively). Women reported slightly higher satisfaction with device comfort, as compared to men (LS-Score 4.8 vs. 4.0). No significant differences were found based on the device model or length of hospitalization. The use of wearable devices in healthcare is rated positively by postoperative inpatients, paving the way for future implementation of these devices in healthcare. However, besides validating the measurement accuracy and demonstrating clinical benefits, several regulatory hurdles must be overcome before implementing wearables in routine clinical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":15513,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-025-01273-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Wearables and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies are increasingly incorporated into healthcare, including perioperative settings. These devices offer continuous non-invasive monitoring of vital signs, patient position, and mobilization. Nonetheless, there is currently little information about tolerance and acceptance of wearables in postoperative patients. We therefore assessed opinions and user experience in postoperative patients who used three popular fitness trackers during their entire hospital stay. Specifically, we evaluate the Apple Watch 7, Garmin Fenix 6 Pro, and Withings ScanWatch. We used an investigator-designed patient questionnaire with 11 questions to quantify patient experience and opinions regarding inpatient and home monitoring. Secondarily, we evaluated compliance and the incidence of associated adverse events during daily patient visits. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests. The majority of the answers to the questions (82.1%) were rated positively defined as Likert-Scale Scores 4 or 5 by the 33 analyzed patients, ranging between 72.7 and 97.0% agreement rate. Specific questions related to data sharing for research and overall user experience received high agreement rates (97.0 and 84.8%, respectively). Women reported slightly higher satisfaction with device comfort, as compared to men (LS-Score 4.8 vs. 4.0). No significant differences were found based on the device model or length of hospitalization. The use of wearable devices in healthcare is rated positively by postoperative inpatients, paving the way for future implementation of these devices in healthcare. However, besides validating the measurement accuracy and demonstrating clinical benefits, several regulatory hurdles must be overcome before implementing wearables in routine clinical care.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.60%
发文量
144
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing is a clinical journal publishing papers related to technology in the fields of anaesthesia, intensive care medicine, emergency medicine, and peri-operative medicine. The journal has links with numerous specialist societies, including editorial board representatives from the European Society for Computing and Technology in Anaesthesia and Intensive Care (ESCTAIC), the Society for Technology in Anesthesia (STA), the Society for Complex Acute Illness (SCAI) and the NAVAt (NAVigating towards your Anaestheisa Targets) group. The journal publishes original papers, narrative and systematic reviews, technological notes, letters to the editor, editorial or commentary papers, and policy statements or guidelines from national or international societies. The journal encourages debate on published papers and technology, including letters commenting on previous publications or technological concerns. The journal occasionally publishes special issues with technological or clinical themes, or reports and abstracts from scientificmeetings. Special issues proposals should be sent to the Editor-in-Chief. Specific details of types of papers, and the clinical and technological content of papers considered within scope can be found in instructions for authors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信