Evidence Hub

Enhancing discharge decision-making through continuous monitoring in an acute admission ward: a randomized controlled trial

Niels Kant, S. H. Garssen, C. Vernooij, Gert-Jan Mauritz, M. V. Koning, F. H. Bosch, C. Doggen

Internal and Emergency Medicine, 2024

400 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

In Acute Admission Wards, vital signs are commonly measured only intermittently. This may result in failure to detect early signs of patient deterioration and impede timely identification of patient stability, ultimately leading to prolonged stays and avoidable hospital admissions. Therefore, continuous vital sign monitoring may improve hospital efficacy. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effect of continuous monitoring on the proportion of patients safely discharged home directly from an Acute Admission Ward. Patients were randomized to either the control group, which received usual care, or the sensor group, which additionally received continuous monitoring using a wearable sensor. The continuous measurements could be considered in discharge decision-making by physicians during the daily bedside rounds. Safe discharge was defined as no unplanned readmissions, emergency department revisits or deaths, within 30 days after discharge. Additionally, length of stay, the number of Intensive Care Unit admissions and Rapid Response Team calls were assessed. In total, 400 patients were randomized, of which 394 completed follow-up, with 196 assigned to the sensor group and 198 to the control group. The proportion of patients safely discharged home was 33.2% in the sensor group and 30.8% in the control group (p = 0.62). No significant differences were observed in secondary outcomes. The trial was terminated prematurely due to futility. In…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 400 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free