Key result
Philips Visual Patient Avatar increases correct vital sign recognition ~74% vs conventional monitoring at 8 meters.
Why the study?
Patient monitoring in the perioperative setting is challenging, especially when monitoring multiple patients simultaneously or managing dynamic situations requiring movement around the operating room.
Does avatar-based patient monitoring improve remote vital sign recognition compared to conventional monitoring in anesthesia providers?
Does avatar-based patient monitoring improve remote vital sign recognition compared to conventional monitoring in anesthesia providers?
Relative Risk: 1.74 (95% CI 1.42–2.14)
p-value: p=<0.001
Avatar-based monitoring significantly improves the perception and correct recognition of vital signs by anesthesia providers from a distance compared to conventional monitoring.
Avatar-based monitoring was associated with higher distant vital sign recognition in simulation; leaves open real-world perioperative impact.
Patient monitoring in the perioperative setting can be challenging, especially when monitoring multiple patients simultaneously or managing dynamic situations that require movement around the operating room. We aimed to evaluate whether avatar-based patient monitoring, which presents vital signs in the form of changing colors, shapes and motion, improves remote vital sign recognition compared to conventional monitoring. We conducted a prospective, single-center, computer-based simulation study to evaluate how anesthesia providers recognize vital signs when using the Philips Visual Patient Avatar at different viewing distances (8 and 16 m) compared to conventional monitoring. The primary outcome was the total number of correctly identified vital signs which were compared for the two distances and the two devices using mixed Poisson regression. We analyzed data from 28 anesthesia providers who participated in 112 simulations. The correct recognition rate using the Visual Patient Avatar compared to conventional monitoring at 8 m was increased by 74% (rate ratio 1.74, 95% CI, 1.42 to 2.14, p < 0.001) and by 51% at 16-meter viewing distance (rate ratio 1.51, 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.87, p < 0.001). We observed scenario-specific superior performance for six vital signs at 8 m. The results provide empirical evidence that avatar-based monitoring can significantly improve the perception of vital signs when using distant vision.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Milovanović et al. (2024) studied Anesthesia providers (n=28). Philips Visual Patient Avatar vs. Conventional monitoring was evaluated on Total number of correctly identified vital signs (Rate ratio 1.74, 95% CI 1.42-2.14, p=<0.001). The Philips Visual Patient Avatar increased the correct recognition rate of vital signs by 74% (rate ratio 1.74) at an 8-meter viewing distance compared to conventional monitoring.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: