Continuous Vital Signs Monitoring with a Wireless and Wearable Earsensor in Surgical Patients: A Clinical Validation Study
Rattachement africain : nl. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
(1) Background: Evidence on the clinical accuracy of wireless photoplethysmography (PPG)-based vital sign monitoring is limited. This study evaluated the accuracy, technical performance, and patient comfort of a novel PPG-based earsensor for measuring oxygen saturation (SpO2), pulse rate (PR), and respiratory rate (RR) in postoperative patients. (2) Methods: In this observational method comparison study, SpO2, PR, and RR were simultaneously recorded using the earsensor and compared with continuous monitoring in patients admitted overnight to the post-anesthesia care unit. Outcome measures were bias, 95% limits of agreement (LoA), and average root mean square (ARMS). Technical performance was evaluated by data loss and data gap duration. Patient comfort was assessed using a questionnaire. (3) Results: Twenty-one patients contributed to 264 h of data. Bias was 1.7% for SpO2 (ARMS 2.4%; LoA −1.8% to 5.1%), 1.2 bpm for PR (ARMS 3.9 bpm; LoA –6.1 to 8.4 bpm), and 0.3 brpm for RR (ARMS 4.4 brpm; LoA –8.4 to 8.9 brpm). Overall, data loss was 42% for SpO2, 33% for RR, and 29% for PR; most data gaps were under 30 min. Patient-reported comfort was high (77%). (4) Conclusions: The earsensor accurately measured SpO2 and PR. RR accuracy was outside the predefined criteria. Despite substantial data loss, patient comfort was high, supporting the potential of PPG-based sensors for unobtrusive vital sign trend monitoring in low-acuity settings.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Continuous Vital Signs Monitoring with a Wireless and Wearable Earsensor in Surgical Patients: A Clinical Validation Study
- Date Crossref
- 12/02/2026
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Utrecht University pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University Medical Center Utrecht Department of Anesthesiology pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
University of Twente Department of Technical Medicine pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
FastFocus B.V. pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
Utrecht University, Department of Anesthesiology — University Medical Center Utrecht et Department of Technical Medicine — University of Twente, avec 1 autre affiliation.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.