Cheng Su-Ann, Tan Shijie Ian, Goh Samuel Li Earn, Ko Stephanie Q
Department of Medicine, National University Hospital, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
Division of Advanced Internal Medicine, National University Hospital, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
J Med Internet Res. 2025 May 26;27:e64753. doi: 10.2196/64753.
Vital signs monitoring (VSM) is used in clinical acuity scoring systems (APACHE [Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation], NEWS2 [National Early Warning Score 2], and SOFA [Sequential Organ Failure Assessment]) to predict patient outcomes for early intervention. Current technological advances enable convenient remote VSM. While the role of VSM for ill, hospital ward-treated patients is clear, its role in the community for acutely ill patients in the hospital at home (HAH) or postacute setting (patients who have just been discharged from an acute hospital stay and at increased risk of deterioration) is less well defined.
We assessed the efficacy of remote VSM for patients in the HAH or postacute setting.
This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. We searched studies in PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and Scopus. Studies focused on the postacute phase were included, as only 2 case series addressed the HAH setting. Risk of bias (ROB) was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, and the case methods outlined by Murad et al for case reports. The GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) framework was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Outcomes of interest included hospital readmissions, mortality, patient satisfaction, and compliance. Risk ratios (RR) were used to measure effect sizes for readmission and mortality, with patient satisfaction and compliance reported descriptively.
The search yielded 5851 records, with 28 studies meeting eligibility criteria (8 RCTs, 7 cohort studies, and 13 case series). Two focused on HAH, while 26 studies addressed the postacute phase. Nineteen studies looked at heart failure, 3 studied respiratory conditions, and 6 studies studied other conditions. Meta-analysis was conducted with 6 studies looking at hospital readmission within 60 days and 4 studies at mortality within 30 days. Readmissions did not significantly decrease (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.61-1.09; P=.16). Significant heterogeneity was observed for readmissions (I=58%). Conversely, mortality reduced significantly (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42-0.99; P=.04). There was no significant heterogeneity in mortality (I=0%). There was high heterogeneity in the study populations, interventions, and outcomes measured. Many studies were of poor quality, with 50% (4/8) of RCTs exhibiting a high ROB. The certainty of evidence for both readmission and mortality was very low.
Published data on the effects of remote VSM in acutely ill patients at home remains scarce. Future studies evaluating all common vital signs (heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and temperature) with consistent monitoring frequencies and clear intervention protocols to better understand how to integrate remote VSM into HAH programs are needed.
PROSPERO CRD42023388827; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023388827.
生命体征监测(VSM)用于临床急性病评分系统(急性生理学与慢性健康状况评估[APACHE]、国家早期预警评分2[NEWS2]和序贯器官衰竭评估[SOFA]),以预测患者结局以便进行早期干预。当前的技术进步使便捷的远程生命体征监测成为可能。虽然生命体征监测对患病的住院病房患者的作用已很明确,但其在社区中对居家医院(HAH)的急性病患者或急性后期环境(刚从急性住院中出院且病情恶化风险增加的患者)的作用尚不明确。
我们评估了远程生命体征监测对居家医院或急性后期环境患者的疗效。
本系统评价遵循PRISMA(系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目)方法。我们在PubMed(MEDLINE)、Embase和Scopus中检索研究。纳入了关注急性后期阶段的研究,因为只有2个病例系列涉及居家医院环境。使用Cochrane随机对照试验偏倚风险工具评估随机对照试验的偏倚风险(ROB),使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估观察性研究的偏倚风险,并使用Murad等人概述的病例方法评估病例报告的偏倚风险。采用GRADE(推荐分级评估、制定和评价)框架评估证据的确定性。感兴趣的结局包括再次入院、死亡率、患者满意度和依从性。风险比(RR)用于衡量再次入院和死亡率的效应大小,患者满意度和依从性以描述性方式报告。
检索共获得5851条记录,其中28项研究符合纳入标准(8项随机对照试验、7项队列研究和13个病例系列)。2项研究关注居家医院,26项研究关注急性后期阶段。19项研究关注心力衰竭,3项研究呼吸系统疾病,6项研究其他疾病。对6项研究60天内再次入院情况和4项研究30天内死亡率进行了Meta分析。再次入院率未显著降低(RR=0.81,95%CI 0.61-1.09;P=0.16)。再次入院情况存在显著异质性(I²=58%)。相反,死亡率显著降低(RR=0.65,95%CI 0.42-0.99;P=0.04)。死亡率不存在显著异质性(I²=0%)。研究人群、干预措施和测量结局存在高度异质性。许多研究质量较差,50%(4/8)的随机对照试验显示偏倚风险高。再次入院和死亡率的证据确定性都非常低。
关于远程生命体征监测对居家急性病患者影响的已发表数据仍然很少。未来需要开展研究,以一致的监测频率和明确的干预方案评估所有常见生命体征(心率、血压、血氧饱和度和体温),以便更好地了解如何将远程生命体征监测纳入居家医院项目。
PROSPERO CRD42023388827;https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023388827。