Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
Clinical and Experimental Emergency Medicine ; (4): 201-206, 2021.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-897565

ABSTRACT

Objective@#Our objective was to study the clinical monitoring capabilities of a low-cost fitness wristband while measuring patient satisfaction with a mobility permitting device in the emergency department. @*Methods@#Patients enrolled were on continuous three-lead telemetry monitoring in a high acuity zone of the emergency department. Patients were given a fitness band to wear while simultaneously monitored with standard three-lead monitor. A brief survey was conducted upon study end, and data was compared between wristband and three-lead telemetry. Median heart rate (HR) values were calculated, a Bland-Altman plot was generated, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated for comparison of the formal telemetry and the inexpensive wristband. @*Results@#Thirty-four patients with an average age of 61.5 years were enrolled. From June to October 2019, over 100 hours of data were collected. In comparison for comfort, participants scored 9.5 of 10, preferring wristband over telemetry. Using a correlation coefficient graph, we found a significant disparity of HR readings within a telemetry range of 40 to 140 beats/min. An R-value of 0.36 was detected. Using a Bland-Altman plot, we observed a significant difference in HR between the telemetry monitor and the wristband. The sensitivity and specificity of the wristband to detect bradycardia (HR 100 beats/min) were 92% and 51%, respectively. @*Conclusion@#Inexpensive fitness bands cannot be a suitable tool for monitoring patient’s HR because of inaccuracy in detecting bradycardia or tachycardia.

2.
Clinical and Experimental Emergency Medicine ; (4): 201-206, 2021.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-889861

ABSTRACT

Objective@#Our objective was to study the clinical monitoring capabilities of a low-cost fitness wristband while measuring patient satisfaction with a mobility permitting device in the emergency department. @*Methods@#Patients enrolled were on continuous three-lead telemetry monitoring in a high acuity zone of the emergency department. Patients were given a fitness band to wear while simultaneously monitored with standard three-lead monitor. A brief survey was conducted upon study end, and data was compared between wristband and three-lead telemetry. Median heart rate (HR) values were calculated, a Bland-Altman plot was generated, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated for comparison of the formal telemetry and the inexpensive wristband. @*Results@#Thirty-four patients with an average age of 61.5 years were enrolled. From June to October 2019, over 100 hours of data were collected. In comparison for comfort, participants scored 9.5 of 10, preferring wristband over telemetry. Using a correlation coefficient graph, we found a significant disparity of HR readings within a telemetry range of 40 to 140 beats/min. An R-value of 0.36 was detected. Using a Bland-Altman plot, we observed a significant difference in HR between the telemetry monitor and the wristband. The sensitivity and specificity of the wristband to detect bradycardia (HR 100 beats/min) were 92% and 51%, respectively. @*Conclusion@#Inexpensive fitness bands cannot be a suitable tool for monitoring patient’s HR because of inaccuracy in detecting bradycardia or tachycardia.

3.
Clinical and Experimental Emergency Medicine ; (4): 144-149, 2020.
Article | WPRIM | ID: wpr-831278

ABSTRACT

In low resource hospitals, strained staffing ratios and lack of telemetry can put patients at risk for clinical deterioration and unexpected cardiac arrest. While traditional telemetry systems can provide real-time continuous vital signs, they are too expensive for widespread use in these settings. At the same time, developed countries such as the United States have been increasingly utilizing remote monitoring systems to shift patient care from hospital to home. While the context is dramatically different, the challenge of monitoring patients in otherwise unmonitored settings is the same. At-home monitoring solutions range from highly comprehensive and expensive systems to inexpensive fitness trackers. In the field of global health, the adoption of this technology has been somewhat limited. We believe that low cost fitness trackers present an opportunity to address the challenge of vital sign monitoring in resource-poor settings at a fraction of the cost of existing technical solutions.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL