Sasseville Maxime, Attisso Eugène, Gagnon Marie-Pierre, Supper Jean-Marc-Wilfried, Ouellet Steven, Amil Samira, Assi Elie Bou, Nguyen Dang Khoa
Faculty of Nursing Sciences, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.
Vitam Research Center on Sustainable Health, Quebec, Canada.
Mhealth. 2024 Jul 12;10:27. doi: 10.21037/mhealth-24-7. eCollection 2024.
There is growing scientific evidence that wearable devices for seizure detection (WDD) perform well in controlled environments. However, their impact on the health and experience of patients with epilepsy (PWE) in community-based settings is less documented. We aimed to synthesize the scientific evidence about the performance of wearable devices used by PWE in community-based settings, and their impact on health outcomes and patient experience.
We performed a mixed methods systematic review. We performed searches in PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science and Embase from inception until December 2022. Independent reviewers checked studies published in English for eligibility based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. We collected information about studies, wearable devices, their performance, and their impact on health outcomes and patient experience. We used a narrative method to synthetize separately data for each question. We assessed the quality of included studies with the QUADAS-C and MMAT tools.
On a total of 9,595 publications, 10 studies met our eligibility criteria. Study populations included mostly PWE who were young (≤18 years) and/or their caregivers. Participants were living at home in most studies. Accelerometer was the wearable device mostly used for seizure detection. Wearable device performance was high (sensitivity ≥80% and false alarm rate ≤1/day), but some concerns remained due to false alarms according to qualitative studies. There was no significant effect of wearable device on quality of life (QoL) measures and no study reported quantitatively other health outcomes. Qualitative studies reported positive effect of wearable devices on QoL, seizure management and seizure-related injuries. Overall, patients reported that the device, especially the accelerometer, was suitable, but when the device was too visible, they found it uncomfortable. Study quality was low to medium.
There is low quality scientific evidence supporting the performance of WDD in a home environment. Although qualitative findings support the positive impacts of wearable devices for patients and caregivers, more quantitative studies are needed to assess their impact on health outcomes such as QoL and seizure-related injuries.
越来越多的科学证据表明,用于癫痫发作检测的可穿戴设备(WDD)在受控环境中表现良好。然而,它们在社区环境中对癫痫患者(PWE)的健康和体验的影响记录较少。我们旨在综合关于PWE在社区环境中使用的可穿戴设备的性能及其对健康结果和患者体验的影响的科学证据。
我们进行了一项混合方法的系统评价。从开始到2022年12月,我们在PubMed、谷歌学术、科学网和Embase中进行了检索。独立评审员根据预定义的纳入和排除标准检查以英文发表的研究是否符合资格。我们收集了有关研究、可穿戴设备、其性能以及对健康结果和患者体验的影响的信息。我们使用叙述性方法分别综合每个问题的数据。我们使用QUADAS-C和MMAT工具评估纳入研究的质量。
在总共9595篇出版物中,10项研究符合我们的资格标准。研究人群主要包括年轻(≤18岁)的PWE和/或他们的照顾者。在大多数研究中,参与者居家生活。加速度计是最常用于癫痫发作检测的可穿戴设备。可穿戴设备的性能较高(灵敏度≥80%且误报率≤1/天),但根据定性研究,由于误报仍存在一些问题。可穿戴设备对生活质量(QoL)指标没有显著影响,也没有研究定量报告其他健康结果。定性研究报告了可穿戴设备对QoL、癫痫管理和癫痫相关损伤的积极影响。总体而言,患者报告该设备,尤其是加速度计,是合适的,但当设备过于显眼时,他们会觉得不舒服。研究质量为低到中等。
有低质量的科学证据支持WDD在家庭环境中的性能。尽管定性研究结果支持可穿戴设备对患者和照顾者的积极影响,但需要更多的定量研究来评估它们对健康结果如QoL和癫痫相关损伤的影响。