Observational studyJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020
Wearability Testing of Ambulatory Vital Sign Monitoring Devices: Prospective Observational Cohort Study.
Observational study in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of wearable continuous vital sign monitoring on deterioration detection and clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Pooled it
- Human factors in escalating acute ward care: a qualitative evidence synthesis.BMJ open quality · 2021Pooled it
- You Can't Be With Your Patients All the Time-Patient and Staff Views of a Wearable Vital Signs Monitoring System.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Clinical Evaluation of a Real-Time Wearable System for Monitoring In-Hospital Ambulatory Patients With COVID-19: Retrospective Data Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Longitudinal cardiorespiratory wearable sleep staging in the home.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- An App-Based Remote Patient Monitoring System With Wrist and In-Ear Wearables in Gastrointestinal Oncology: Prospective Feasibility Pilot Study.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- Selecting Wearable Devices to Measure Cardiovascular Functions in Community-Dwelling Adults: Application of a Practical Guide for Device Selection.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Review
- Stress in action wearables database: A database of noninvasive wearable monitors with systematic technical, reliability, validity, and usability information.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Exploring the Dynamics of Canine-Assisted Interactions: A Wearable Approach to Understanding Interspecies Well-Being.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Human Factors, Human-Centered Design, and Usability of Sensor-Based Digital Health Technologies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- A practical guide for selecting continuous monitoring wearable devices for community-dwelling adults.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Digital biomarkers for non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease: the state of the art.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Review
- Continuous vital sign monitoring in patients after elective abdominal surgery: a retrospective study on clinical outcomes and costs.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2023Article
- ECG Signal Quality Assessments of a Small Bipolar Single-Lead Wearable Patch Sensor.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2022Article
- Patient and clinician use characteristics and perceptions of pulse oximeter use: A scoping review.International journal of medical informatics · 2022Article
- A proof of concept for continuous, non-invasive, free-living vital signs monitoring to predict readmission following an acute exacerbation of COPD: a prospective cohort study.Respiratory research · 2022Article
- Experiences of current vital signs monitoring practices and views of wearable monitoring: A qualitative study in patients and nurses.Journal of advanced nursing · 2022Article
- Physiological sleep measures predict time to 15-year mortality in community adults: Application of a novel machine learning framework.Journal of sleep research · 2021Article
- A Chest Patch for Continuous Vital Sign Monitoring: Clinical Validation Study During Movement and Controlled Hypoxia.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- A Real-Time Wearable System for Monitoring Vital Signs of COVID-19 Patients in a Hospital Setting.Frontiers in digital health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTimely recognition of patient deterioration remains challenging. Ambulatory monitoring systems (AMSs) may provide support to current monitoring practices; however, they need to be thoroughly tested before implementation in the clinical environment for early detection of deterioration.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the wearability of a selection of commercially available AMSs to inform a future prospective study of ambulatory vital sign monitors in an acute hospital ward.
methodsFive pulse oximeters (4 with finger probes and 1 wrist-worn only, collecting pulse rates and oxygen saturation) and 2 chest patches (collecting heart rates and respiratory rates) were selected to be part of this study: The 2 chest-worn patches were VitalPatch (VitalConnect) and Peerbridge Cor (Peerbridge); the 4 wrist-worn devices with finger probe were Nonin WristOx2 3150 (Nonin), Checkme O2+ (Viatom Technology), PC-68B, and AP-20 (both from Creative Medical); and the 1 solely wrist-worn device was Wavelet (Wavelet Health). Adult participants wore each device for up to 72 hours while performing usual "activities of daily living" and were asked to score the perceived exertion and perception of pain or discomfort by using the Borg CR-10 scale; thoughts and feelings caused by the AMS using the Comfort Rating Scale (CRS); and to provide general free text feedback. Median and IQRs were reported and nonparametric tests were used to assess differences between the devices' CRS scores.
resultsQuantitative scores and feedback were collected in 70 completed questionnaires from 20 healthy volunteers, with each device tested approximately 10 times. The Wavelet seemed to be the most wearable device (P<.001) with an overall median (IQR) CRS score of 1.00 (0.88). There were no statistically significant differences in wearability between the chest patches in the CRS total score; however, the VitalPatch was superior in the Attachment section (P=.04) with a median (IQR) score of 3.00 (1.00). General pain and discomfort scores and total percentage of time worn are also reflective of this.
conclusionsOur results suggest that adult participants prefer to wear wrist-worn pulse oximeters without a probe compressing the fingertip and they prefer to wear a smaller chest patch. A compromise between wearability, reliability, and accuracy should be made for successful and practical integration of AMSs within the hospital environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.