Dataset Information

Can vital signs recorded in patients' homes aid decision making in emergency care? A Scoping Review.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Use of tele-health programs and wearable sensors that allow patients to monitor their own vital signs have been expanded in response to COVID-19. We aimed to explore the utility of patient-held data during presentation as medical emergencies.

Methods

We undertook a systematic scoping review of two groups of studies: studies using non-invasive vital sign monitoring in patients with chronic diseases aimed at preventing unscheduled reviews in primary care, hospitalization or emergency department visits and studies using vital sign measurements from wearable sensors for decision making by clinicians on presentation of these patients as emergencies. Only studies that described a comparator or control group were included. Studies limited to inpatient use of devices were excluded.

Results

The initial search resulted in 896 references for screening, nine more studies were identified through searches of references. 26 studies fulfilled inclusion and exclusion criteria and were further analyzed. The majority of studies were from telehealth programs of patients with congestive heart failure or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. There was limited evidence that patient held data is currently used to risk-stratify the admission or discharge process for medical emergencies. Studies that showed impact on mortality or hospital admission rates measured vital signs at least daily. We identified no interventional study using commercially available sensors in watches or smart phones.

Conclusions

Further research is needed to determine utility of patient held monitoring devices to guide management of acute medical emergencies at the patients' home, on presentation to hospital and after discharge back to the community.

SUBMITTER: Hamza M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8035051 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesWe provided an overview of the literature on decision aid interventions for family caregivers of older adults with advanced dementia regarding decision making about tube feeding. We synthesized (1) the use of theory during the development, implementation, and evaluation of decision aids; (2) the development, content, and delivery of decision aid interventions; (3) caregivers' experience with decision aid interventions; and (4) the effect of decision aid interventions on caregivers' quality of decision-making about feeding options.DesignScoping review.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed studies published January 1, 2000-June 30, 2022, in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases. The process was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework, which includes identifying the research question, choosing related studies, charting the data, and summarizing results. Empirical articles concerning the decision aid interventions about feeding options were selected.ResultsSix publications reporting 4 unique decision aid interventions were included. All the interventions targeted caregivers of older adults with advanced dementia. Three decision aids were culturally adapted from existing decision aids. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework and the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Framework were used in these 6 publications. Interventions aimed to improve decision making regarding tube feeding for caregivers through static delivery methods. Caregivers rated these decision aids as helpful and acceptable. Decisional conflict and knowledge of feeding options were the most common outcomes evaluated. Reduction in decisional conflict and increase in knowledge were consistently found among dementia caregivers, but no intervention effects were found on preferences for the use of tube feeding.Conclusions and implicationsDecision aid interventions effectively improve decision-making regarding tube feeding among the target population. Cultural adaptation of an existing decision aid intervention is the main strategy. However, the lack of guidance of a cultural adaptation framework in this process may lead to difficulties explaining caregivers' behavioral changes. Moreover, merely providing information is not enough to change caregivers' preferences or behavior of use of tube feeding. A systematic approach to cultural adaptation and interactive intervention is needed in future studies.

Project description:IntroductionChildren often present to the emergency department (ED) with minor conditions such as fever and have persistently abnormal vital signs. We hypothesized that a significant portion of children discharged from the ED would have abnormal vital signs and that those discharged with abnormal vital signs would experience very few adverse events.MethodsWe performed a retrospective chart review encompassing a 44-month period of all pediatric patients (aged two months to 17 years) who were discharged from the ED with an abnormal pulse rate, respiratory rate, temperature, or oxygen saturation. We used a local quality assurance database to identify pre-defined adverse events after discharge in this population. Our primary aim was to determine the proportion of children discharged with abnormal vital signs and the frequency and nature of adverse events. Additionally, we performed a sub-analysis comparing the rate of adverse events in children discharged with normal vs. abnormal vital signs, as well as a standardized review of the nature of each adverse event.ResultsOf 33,185 children discharged during the study period, 5,540 (17%) of these patients had at least one abnormal vital sign. There were 24/5,540 (0.43%) adverse events in the children with at least one abnormal vital sign vs. 47/27,645 (0.17%) adverse events in the children with normal vital signs [relative risk = 2.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.6 to 2.4)].However, upon review of each adverse event we found only one case that was related to the index visit, was potentially preventable by a 23-hour hospital observation, and caused permanent disability.ConclusionIn our study population, 17% of the children were discharged with at least one abnormal vital sign, and there were very few adverse (0.43%) events associated with this practice. Heart rate was the most common abnormal vital sign leading to an adverse event. Severe adverse events that were potentially related to the abnormal vital sign(s) were exceedingly rare. Additional research is needed in broader populations to better determine the rate of adverse events and possible methods of avoiding them.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Care of patients with diabetes often occurs in the context of other chronic illness. Competing disease priorities and competing patient-physician priorities present challenges in the provision of care for the complex patient. Guideline implementation interventions to date do not acknowledge these intricacies of clinical practice. As a result, patients and providers are left overwhelmed and paralyzed by the sheer volume of recommendations and tasks. An individualized approach to the patient with diabetes and multiple comorbid conditions using shared decision-making (SDM) and goal setting has been advocated as a patient-centred approach that may facilitate prioritization of treatment options. Furthermore, incorporating interprofessional integration into practice may overcome barriers to implementation. However, these strategies have not been taken up extensively in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES:To systematically develop and test an interprofessional SDM and goal-setting toolkit for patients with diabetes and other chronic diseases, following the Knowledge to Action framework. METHODS:1. Feasibility study: Individual interviews with primary care physicians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, and patients with diabetes will be conducted, exploring their experiences with shared decision-making and priority-setting, including facilitators and barriers, the relevance of a decision aid and toolkit for priority-setting, and how best to integrate it into practice.2. Toolkit development: Based on this data, an evidence-based multi-component SDM toolkit will be developed. The toolkit will be reviewed by content experts (primary care, endocrinology, geriatricians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, patients) for accuracy and comprehensiveness.3. Heuristic evaluation: A human factors engineer will review the toolkit and identify, list and categorize usability issues by severity.4. Usability testing: This will be done using cognitive task analysis.5. Iterative refinement: Throughout the development process, the toolkit will be refined through several iterative cycles of feedback and redesign. DISCUSSION:Interprofessional shared decision-making regarding priority-setting with the use of a decision aid toolkit may help prioritize care of individuals with multiple comorbid conditions. Adhering to principles of user-centered design, we will develop and refine a toolkit to assess the feasibility of this approach.