面向消费者的可穿戴技术在内窥镜手术过程中进行连续监测的准确性和作用。

IF 3.2 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Frontiers in digital health Pub Date : 2024-09-04 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fdgth.2024.1422929
Jad P AbiMansour, Jyotroop Kaur, Saran Velaga, Priyanka Vatsavayi, Matthew Vogt, Vinay Chandrasekhara
{"title":"面向消费者的可穿戴技术在内窥镜手术过程中进行连续监测的准确性和作用。","authors":"Jad P AbiMansour, Jyotroop Kaur, Saran Velaga, Priyanka Vatsavayi, Matthew Vogt, Vinay Chandrasekhara","doi":"10.3389/fdgth.2024.1422929","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Consumer facing wearable devices capture significant amounts of biometric data. The primary aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of consumer-facing wearable technology for continuous monitoring compared to standard anesthesia monitoring during endoscopic procedures. Secondary aims were to assess patient and provider perceptions of these devices in clinical settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing endoscopy with anesthesia support from June 2021 to June 2022 were provided a smartwatch (Apple Watch Series 7, Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA) and accessories including continuous ECG monitor and pulse oximeter (Qardio Inc., San Francisco, CA) for the duration of their procedure. Vital sign data from the wearable devices was compared to in-room anesthesia monitors. Concordance with anesthesia monitoring was assessed with interclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Surveys were then distributed to patients and clinicians to assess patient and provider preferences regarding the use of the wearable devices during procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>292 unique procedures were enrolled with a median anesthesia duration of 34 min (IQR 25-47). High fidelity readings were successfully recorded with wearable devices for heart rate in 279 (95.5%) cases, oxygen in 203 (69.5%), and respiratory rate in 154 (52.7%). ICCs for watch and accessories were 0.54 (95% CI 0.46-0.62) for tachycardia, 0.03 (95% CI 0-0.14) for bradycardia, and 0.33 (0.22-0.43) for oxygen desaturation. Patients generally felt the devices were more accurate (56.3% vs. 20.0% agree, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and more permissible (53.9% vs. 33.3% agree, <i>p</i> < 0.001) to wear during a procedure than providers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Smartwatches perform poorly for continuous data collection compared to gold standard anesthesia monitoring. Refinement in software development is required if these devices are to be used for continuous, intensive vital sign monitoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":73078,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in digital health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11443421/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy and role of consumer facing wearable technology for continuous monitoring during endoscopic procedures.\",\"authors\":\"Jad P AbiMansour, Jyotroop Kaur, Saran Velaga, Priyanka Vatsavayi, Matthew Vogt, Vinay Chandrasekhara\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fdgth.2024.1422929\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Consumer facing wearable devices capture significant amounts of biometric data. The primary aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of consumer-facing wearable technology for continuous monitoring compared to standard anesthesia monitoring during endoscopic procedures. Secondary aims were to assess patient and provider perceptions of these devices in clinical settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing endoscopy with anesthesia support from June 2021 to June 2022 were provided a smartwatch (Apple Watch Series 7, Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA) and accessories including continuous ECG monitor and pulse oximeter (Qardio Inc., San Francisco, CA) for the duration of their procedure. Vital sign data from the wearable devices was compared to in-room anesthesia monitors. Concordance with anesthesia monitoring was assessed with interclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Surveys were then distributed to patients and clinicians to assess patient and provider preferences regarding the use of the wearable devices during procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>292 unique procedures were enrolled with a median anesthesia duration of 34 min (IQR 25-47). High fidelity readings were successfully recorded with wearable devices for heart rate in 279 (95.5%) cases, oxygen in 203 (69.5%), and respiratory rate in 154 (52.7%). ICCs for watch and accessories were 0.54 (95% CI 0.46-0.62) for tachycardia, 0.03 (95% CI 0-0.14) for bradycardia, and 0.33 (0.22-0.43) for oxygen desaturation. Patients generally felt the devices were more accurate (56.3% vs. 20.0% agree, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and more permissible (53.9% vs. 33.3% agree, <i>p</i> < 0.001) to wear during a procedure than providers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Smartwatches perform poorly for continuous data collection compared to gold standard anesthesia monitoring. Refinement in software development is required if these devices are to be used for continuous, intensive vital sign monitoring.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73078,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in digital health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11443421/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in digital health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1422929\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1422929","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:面向消费者的可穿戴设备可捕获大量生物识别数据。本研究的主要目的是确定在内窥镜手术过程中,与标准麻醉监测相比,面向消费者的可穿戴技术用于连续监测的准确性。次要目的是评估临床环境中患者和提供者对这些设备的看法:2021年6月至2022年6月期间,接受内窥镜检查并接受麻醉支持的患者在手术期间将获得一块智能手表(Apple Watch Series 7,苹果公司,加利福尼亚州库比蒂诺市)和包括连续心电图监测仪和脉搏血氧计(Qardio Inc.,加利福尼亚州旧金山)在内的配件。来自可穿戴设备的生命体征数据与室内麻醉监护仪进行了比较。通过类间相关系数 (ICC) 评估与麻醉监测的一致性。然后向患者和临床医生发放了调查问卷,以评估患者和医疗服务提供者对在手术过程中使用可穿戴设备的偏好。结果:共进行了 292 例手术,麻醉持续时间中位数为 34 分钟(IQR 25-47)。使用可穿戴设备成功记录了 279 例(95.5%)心率、203 例(69.5%)血氧和 154 例(52.7%)呼吸频率的高保真读数。手表和配件的心动过速 ICC 值为 0.54(95% CI 0.46-0.62),心动过缓 ICC 值为 0.03(95% CI 0-0.14),血氧饱和度 ICC 值为 0.33(0.22-0.43)。患者普遍认为设备更准确(56.3% 对 20.0% 同意,p p 结论:与金标准麻醉监测相比,智能手表在连续数据收集方面表现不佳。如果要将这些设备用于连续、密集的生命体征监测,就必须改进软件开发。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Accuracy and role of consumer facing wearable technology for continuous monitoring during endoscopic procedures.

Background: Consumer facing wearable devices capture significant amounts of biometric data. The primary aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of consumer-facing wearable technology for continuous monitoring compared to standard anesthesia monitoring during endoscopic procedures. Secondary aims were to assess patient and provider perceptions of these devices in clinical settings.

Methods: Patients undergoing endoscopy with anesthesia support from June 2021 to June 2022 were provided a smartwatch (Apple Watch Series 7, Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA) and accessories including continuous ECG monitor and pulse oximeter (Qardio Inc., San Francisco, CA) for the duration of their procedure. Vital sign data from the wearable devices was compared to in-room anesthesia monitors. Concordance with anesthesia monitoring was assessed with interclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Surveys were then distributed to patients and clinicians to assess patient and provider preferences regarding the use of the wearable devices during procedures.

Results: 292 unique procedures were enrolled with a median anesthesia duration of 34 min (IQR 25-47). High fidelity readings were successfully recorded with wearable devices for heart rate in 279 (95.5%) cases, oxygen in 203 (69.5%), and respiratory rate in 154 (52.7%). ICCs for watch and accessories were 0.54 (95% CI 0.46-0.62) for tachycardia, 0.03 (95% CI 0-0.14) for bradycardia, and 0.33 (0.22-0.43) for oxygen desaturation. Patients generally felt the devices were more accurate (56.3% vs. 20.0% agree, p < 0.001) and more permissible (53.9% vs. 33.3% agree, p < 0.001) to wear during a procedure than providers.

Conclusion: Smartwatches perform poorly for continuous data collection compared to gold standard anesthesia monitoring. Refinement in software development is required if these devices are to be used for continuous, intensive vital sign monitoring.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
A use case of ChatGPT: summary of an expert panel discussion on electronic health records and implementation science. Remote monitoring and teleconsultations can reduce greenhouse gas emissions while maintaining quality of care in cystic fibrosis. Accessing medical care in the era of the digital revolution: arguing the case for the "digitally marginalised". Biofuser: a multi-source data fusion platform for fusing the data of fermentation process devices. Cost-effectiveness of digital interventions for mental health: current evidence, common misconceptions, and future directions.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1