Why the study?
The feasibility of monitoring heart and respiratory rates with non-wearable devices and the consistency of the measured rates had not been reported.
Does a sheet-type non-wearable device accurately measure heart and respiratory rates compared to standard methods in healthy and older individuals?
Does a sheet-type non-wearable device accurately measure heart and respiratory rates compared to standard methods in healthy and older individuals?
A sheet-type non-wearable device provides heart and respiratory rate measurements consistent with standard methods, suggesting feasibility for continuous vital sign monitoring in older adults.
Non-wearable devices yield consistent HR/RR readings in pilot data; leaves open clinical utility for early detection in older adults, needing prospective validation.
BACKGROUND As Japan is the world’s fastest-aging society with a declining population, it is challenging to secure human resources for care providers. Therefore, the Japanese government is promoting digital transformation (DX) and the use of nursing care equipment, including non-wearable devices that monitor heart and respiratory rates. However, the feasibility of monitoring heart and respiratory rates with non-wearable devices and the consistency of the rates measured have not been reported. OBJECTIVE In this study, we focus on a sheet-type non-wearable device (Safety Sheep Sensor) that has been introduced in many nursing homes. We evaluated the feasibility of monitoring heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) continuously using non-wearable devices and the consistency of the HR and RR measured. METHODS A sheet-type non-wearable device (Safety Sheep Sensor) that measured HR and RR every minute through body vibrations was placed under the mattress of each participant. The participants in Study 1 were healthy individuals aged 20–60 years (N=21), while those in Study 2 were older individuals living in multi-dwelling houses and required nursing care (N=20). The HR was measured using standard methods by the nurse and using the wearable device (WD; Silmee Bar type Lite sensor), and RR was measured by the nurse. The primary outcome was the mean difference in HR and RR between non-wearable devices and standard methods. RESULTS The mean difference in HR was -0.32 (standard deviation (SD): 3.12) in Study 1 and 0.04 (SD: 3.98) in Study 2; both differences were within the predefined accepted discrepancies (< 5 beats). The mean difference in RR was -0.98 (SD: 3.01) in Study 1 and -0.49 (SD: 2.40) in Study 2; both differences were within the predefined accepted discrepancies (3 breaths). CONCLUSIONS HR and RR measurements obtained using the non-wearable devices and the standard method were similar. Continuous monitoring of vital signs using non-wearable devices can aid in the early detection of abnormal conditions in older people.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ikuta et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: