The Value of Remote Vital Signs Monitoring in Detecting Clinical Deterioration in Patients in Hospital at Home Programs or Postacute Medical Patients in the Community: Systematic Review.

IF 5.8 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Su-Ann Cheng, Shijie Ian Tan, Samuel Li Earn Goh, Stephanie Q Ko
{"title":"The Value of Remote Vital Signs Monitoring in Detecting Clinical Deterioration in Patients in Hospital at Home Programs or Postacute Medical Patients in the Community: Systematic Review.","authors":"Su-Ann Cheng, Shijie Ian Tan, Samuel Li Earn Goh, Stephanie Q Ko","doi":"10.2196/64753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vital signs monitoring (VSM) is used in clinical acuity scoring systems (APACHE [Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation], NEWS2 [National Early Warning Score 2], and SOFA [Sequential Organ Failure Assessment]) to predict patient outcomes for early intervention. Current technological advances enable convenient remote VSM. While the role of VSM for ill, hospital ward-treated patients is clear, its role in the community for acutely ill patients in the hospital at home (HAH) or postacute setting (patients who have just been discharged from an acute hospital stay and at increased risk of deterioration) is less well defined.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We assessed the efficacy of remote VSM for patients in the HAH or postacute setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. We searched studies in PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and Scopus. Studies focused on the postacute phase were included, as only 2 case series addressed the HAH setting. Risk of bias (ROB) was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, and the case methods outlined by Murad et al for case reports. The GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) framework was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Outcomes of interest included hospital readmissions, mortality, patient satisfaction, and compliance. Risk ratios (RR) were used to measure effect sizes for readmission and mortality, with patient satisfaction and compliance reported descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search yielded 5851 records, with 28 studies meeting eligibility criteria (8 RCTs, 7 cohort studies, and 13 case series). Two focused on HAH, while 26 studies addressed the postacute phase. Nineteen studies looked at heart failure, 3 studied respiratory conditions, and 6 studies studied other conditions. Meta-analysis was conducted with 6 studies looking at hospital readmission within 60 days and 4 studies at mortality within 30 days. Readmissions did not significantly decrease (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.61-1.09; P=.16). Significant heterogeneity was observed for readmissions (I<sup>2</sup>=58%). Conversely, mortality reduced significantly (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42-0.99; P=.04). There was no significant heterogeneity in mortality (I<sup>2</sup>=0%). There was high heterogeneity in the study populations, interventions, and outcomes measured. Many studies were of poor quality, with 50% (4/8) of RCTs exhibiting a high ROB. The certainty of evidence for both readmission and mortality was very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Published data on the effects of remote VSM in acutely ill patients at home remains scarce. Future studies evaluating all common vital signs (heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and temperature) with consistent monitoring frequencies and clear intervention protocols to better understand how to integrate remote VSM into HAH programs are needed.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023388827; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023388827.</p>","PeriodicalId":16337,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Internet Research","volume":"27 ","pages":"e64753"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Internet Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/64753","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Vital signs monitoring (VSM) is used in clinical acuity scoring systems (APACHE [Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation], NEWS2 [National Early Warning Score 2], and SOFA [Sequential Organ Failure Assessment]) to predict patient outcomes for early intervention. Current technological advances enable convenient remote VSM. While the role of VSM for ill, hospital ward-treated patients is clear, its role in the community for acutely ill patients in the hospital at home (HAH) or postacute setting (patients who have just been discharged from an acute hospital stay and at increased risk of deterioration) is less well defined.

Objective: We assessed the efficacy of remote VSM for patients in the HAH or postacute setting.

Methods: This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. We searched studies in PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and Scopus. Studies focused on the postacute phase were included, as only 2 case series addressed the HAH setting. Risk of bias (ROB) was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, and the case methods outlined by Murad et al for case reports. The GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) framework was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Outcomes of interest included hospital readmissions, mortality, patient satisfaction, and compliance. Risk ratios (RR) were used to measure effect sizes for readmission and mortality, with patient satisfaction and compliance reported descriptively.

Results: The search yielded 5851 records, with 28 studies meeting eligibility criteria (8 RCTs, 7 cohort studies, and 13 case series). Two focused on HAH, while 26 studies addressed the postacute phase. Nineteen studies looked at heart failure, 3 studied respiratory conditions, and 6 studies studied other conditions. Meta-analysis was conducted with 6 studies looking at hospital readmission within 60 days and 4 studies at mortality within 30 days. Readmissions did not significantly decrease (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.61-1.09; P=.16). Significant heterogeneity was observed for readmissions (I2=58%). Conversely, mortality reduced significantly (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42-0.99; P=.04). There was no significant heterogeneity in mortality (I2=0%). There was high heterogeneity in the study populations, interventions, and outcomes measured. Many studies were of poor quality, with 50% (4/8) of RCTs exhibiting a high ROB. The certainty of evidence for both readmission and mortality was very low.

Conclusions: Published data on the effects of remote VSM in acutely ill patients at home remains scarce. Future studies evaluating all common vital signs (heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and temperature) with consistent monitoring frequencies and clear intervention protocols to better understand how to integrate remote VSM into HAH programs are needed.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42023388827; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023388827.

远程生命体征监测在发现居家医院项目患者或社区急症后患者临床恶化中的价值:系统评价。
背景:生命体征监测(VSM)用于临床视力评分系统(APACHE[急性生理和慢性健康评估]、NEWS2[国家预警评分2]和SOFA[序期器官衰竭评估])来预测患者早期干预的结果。当前的技术进步使远程VSM变得方便。虽然VSM对生病的住院患者的作用是明确的,但它在社区中对在家医院(HAH)的急性患者或急性后环境(刚刚从急性住院出院且病情恶化风险增加的患者)的作用却不太明确。目的:评估远程VSM对急性脑梗塞或急性脑梗死后患者的疗效。方法:本系统评价遵循PRISMA(系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目)方法学。我们检索了PubMed (MEDLINE)、Embase和Scopus中的研究。研究集中于急性期后,因为只有2个病例系列涉及HAH设置。对随机对照试验(rct)使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具(Risk of bias Tool),观察性研究使用Newcastle-Ottawa量表,病例报告使用Murad等人概述的病例方法评估偏倚风险(ROB)。GRADE(分级建议评估、发展和评价)框架用于评估证据的确定性。研究的结果包括再入院率、死亡率、患者满意度和依从性。风险比(RR)用于测量再入院和死亡率的效应大小,并描述性地报告患者满意度和依从性。结果:检索得到5851条记录,其中28项研究符合资格标准(8项随机对照试验,7项队列研究和13例病例系列)。两项研究关注HAH,而26项研究关注急性期后。19项研究关注心力衰竭,3项研究呼吸系统疾病,6项研究其他疾病。对60天内再入院的6项研究和30天内死亡率的4项研究进行了荟萃分析。再入院率无显著降低(RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.61-1.09;P = 16)。再入院的异质性显著(I2=58%)。相反,死亡率显著降低(RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42-0.99;P = .04点)。死亡率无显著异质性(I2=0%)。在研究人群、干预措施和测量结果中存在高度异质性。许多研究质量较差,50%(4/8)的随机对照试验显示较高的ROB。再入院和死亡率的证据的确定性非常低。结论:发表的关于远程VSM在家中对急性病人的影响的数据仍然很少。未来的研究需要评估所有常见的生命体征(心率、血压、血氧饱和度和体温),并采用一致的监测频率和明确的干预方案,以更好地了解如何将远程VSM整合到HAH程序中。试验注册:PROSPERO CRD42023388827;https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023388827。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
5.40%
发文量
654
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) is a highly respected publication in the field of health informatics and health services. With a founding date in 1999, JMIR has been a pioneer in the field for over two decades. As a leader in the industry, the journal focuses on digital health, data science, health informatics, and emerging technologies for health, medicine, and biomedical research. It is recognized as a top publication in these disciplines, ranking in the first quartile (Q1) by Impact Factor. Notably, JMIR holds the prestigious position of being ranked #1 on Google Scholar within the "Medical Informatics" discipline.
×
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