Lodewyk Kalee, Wiebe Madeleine, Dennett Liz, Larsson Jake, Greenshaw Andrew, Hayward Jake
Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
PLOS Digit Health. 2025 May 9;4(5):e0000860. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000860. eCollection 2025 May.
The use of wearable devices for remote health monitoring is a rapidly expanding field. These devices might benefit patients and providers; however, they are not yet widely used in healthcare. This scoping review assesses the current state of the literature on wearable devices for remote health monitoring in non-hospital settings.
CINAHL, Scopus, Embase and MEDLINE were searched until August 5, 2024. We performed citation searching and searched Google Scholar. Studies on wearable devices in an outpatient setting with a clinically relevant, measurable outcome were included and were categorized according to intended use of data: monitoring of existing disease vs. diagnosis of new disease.
Eighty studies met eligibility criteria. Most studies used device data to monitor a chronic disease (68/80, 85%), most often neurodegenerative (22/68, 32%). Twelve studies (12/80, 15%) used device data to diagnose new disease, majority being cardiovascular (9/12, 75%). A range of wearable devices were studied with watches and bracelets being most common (50/80, 63%). Only six studies (8%) were randomized controlled trials, four of which (67%) showed evidence of positive clinical impact. Feasibility determinants were inconsistently reported, including compliance (51/80, 64%), patient-reported useability (13/80, 16%), and participant technology literacy (1/80, 1%).
Evidence for clinical effectiveness of wearable devices remains scant. Heterogeneity across studies in terms of devices, disease targets and monitoring protocols makes data synthesis challenging, especially given the rapid pace of technical innovation. These findings provide direction for future research and implementation of wearable devices in healthcare.
使用可穿戴设备进行远程健康监测是一个迅速发展的领域。这些设备可能会使患者和医疗服务提供者受益;然而,它们在医疗保健中尚未得到广泛应用。本综述评估了非医院环境中用于远程健康监测的可穿戴设备的文献现状。
检索了CINAHL、Scopus、Embase和MEDLINE数据库,检索截止至2024年8月5日。我们进行了引文检索并搜索了谷歌学术。纳入了在门诊环境中使用可穿戴设备且具有临床相关、可测量结果的研究,并根据数据的预期用途进行分类:监测现有疾病与诊断新疾病。
80项研究符合纳入标准。大多数研究使用设备数据监测慢性病(68/80,85%),最常见的是神经退行性疾病(22/68,32%)。12项研究(12/80,15%)使用设备数据诊断新疾病,大多数是心血管疾病(9/12,75%)。研究了一系列可穿戴设备,其中手表和手环最为常见(50/80,63%)。只有6项研究(8%)是随机对照试验,其中4项(67%)显示出积极临床影响的证据。可行性决定因素的报告不一致,包括依从性(51/80,64%)、患者报告的易用性(13/80,16%)和参与者的技术素养(1/80,1%)。
可穿戴设备临床有效性的证据仍然不足。由于研究在设备、疾病靶点和监测方案方面存在异质性,使得数据合成具有挑战性,特别是考虑到技术创新的快速步伐。这些发现为可穿戴设备在医疗保健中的未来研究和应用提供了方向。