Key result
Contactless video monitoring of respiratory and heart rates in non-acuity settings showed high correlation with standard methods and low mean absolute errors.
Why the study?
Does a contactless video monitoring system accurately measure respiratory rate and heart rate compared to standard monitors in non-acuity hospital settings?
Cross-Sectional (n=158)
No
Does a contactless video monitoring system accurately measure respiratory rate and heart rate compared to standard monitors in non-acuity hospital settings?
Contactless video monitoring provides an accurate and unobtrusive method for measuring respiratory and heart rates in non-acuity hospital settings.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Continuous wearable monitoring appears feasible on general wards; hypothesis-generating for clinical outcome benefits in prospective trials.
OBJECTIVE: Patient monitoring in general wards primarily involves intermittent observation of temperature, heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR) and blood pressure performed by the nursing staff. Several hours can lapse between such measurements, and the patient may go unobserved. Despite the growing widespread use of sensors to monitor vital signs and physical activities of healthy individuals, most acutely ill hospitalised patients remain unmonitored, leaving them at an increased risk. We investigated whether a contactless monitoring system could measure vital parameters, such as HR and RR, in a real-world hospital setting. DESIGN: A cross-sectional prospective study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We examined the suitability of employing a non-contact monitoring system in a low-acuity setup at a tertiary care hospital in India. Measurements were performed on 158 subjects, with data acquired through contactless monitoring from the general ward and dialysis unit. OUTCOME MEASURES: Vital parameters (RR and HR) were measured using a video camera in a non-acuity setting. RESULTS: Three distinct combinations of contactless monitoring afforded excellent accuracy. Contactless RR monitoring was linearly correlated with Alice NightOne and manual counts, presenting coefficients of determination of 0.88 and 0.90, respectively. Contactless HR monitoring presented a coefficient of determination of 0.91. The mean absolute errors were 0.84 and 2.15 beats per minute for RR and HR, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with existing Food and Drug Administration-approved monitors, the findings of the present study revealed that contactless monitoring of RR and HR accurately represented study populations in non-acuity settings. Contactless video monitoring is an unobtrusive and dependable method for monitoring and recording RR and HR. Further research is needed to validate its dependability and utility in other settings, including acute care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CTRI/2018/11/016246.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Varma et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Low-acuity hospitalised patients (n=158). Contactless video monitoring vs. Alice NightOne and manual counts was evaluated on Vital parameters (RR and HR). Contactless video monitoring of respiratory and heart rates in non-acuity settings showed high correlation with standard methods and low mean absolute errors.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: