Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29201377›Full record

ArticleJournal of intensive care2017

Use of wearable devices for post-discharge monitoring of ICU patients: a feasibility study.

Ryan R Kroll, Erica D McKenzie, J Gordon Boyd, Prameet Sheth, Daniel Howes, Michael Wood, David M Maslove, WEARable Information Technology for hospital INpatients (WEARIT-IN) study group

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intensive care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02527408 completednot on this map

Wearable Technology for Hospital Inpatients

TypeobservationalSponsorQueen's UniversityRan2015 to 2016Enrolled50ConditionsHeart Rate Monitoring
NCT03646435 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Use of Fitbit Charge 2 in Hospitalized General Medicine Patients to Monitor Health Outcomes

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Health Network, TorontoRan2019 to 2019Enrolled50ConditionsHospitalizationsArmsFitbit Charge 2
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ryan R Kroll *Department of Critical Care Medicine, Queen's University and Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario Canada.
Erica D McKenzie *School of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario Canada.
J Gordon BoydDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Queen's University and Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario Canada.
Prameet ShethDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, Queen's University and Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario Canada.
Daniel HowesDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Queen's University and Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario Canada.
Michael WoodDepartment of Neuroscience, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario Canada.
David M MasloveDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Queen's University and Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, Ontario Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0765-7158
WEARable Information Technology for hospital INpatients (WEARIT-IN) study group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWearable devices generate signals detecting activity, sleep, and heart rate, all of which could enable detailed and near-continuous characterization of recovery following critical illness.

methodsTo determine the feasibility of using a wrist-worn personal fitness tracker among patients recovering from critical illness, we conducted a prospective observational study of a convenience sample of 50 stable ICU patients. We assessed device wearability, the extent of data capture, sensitivity and specificity for detecting heart rate excursions, and correlations with questionnaire-derived sleep quality measures.

resultsWearable devices were worn over a 24-h period, with excellent capture of data. While specificity for the detection of tachycardia was high (98.8%), sensitivity was low to moderate (69.5%). There was a moderate correlation between wearable-derived sleep duration and questionnaire-derived sleep quality (

conclusionsWe found that wearable devices could be worn by patients recovering from critical illness and could generate useful data for the majority of patients with little adverse effect. Further development and study are needed to better define and enhance the role of wearables in the monitoring of post-ICU recovery.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT02527408.

Indexed as

Critical careHeart rate monitoringMedical informaticsMobile health technologiesSleep qualityValidation studyWearable devices

Identifiers

PMID29201377
PMCPMC5698959

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.