Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40050564›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2025

Postoperative use of fitness trackers for continuous monitoring of vital signs: a survey of hospitalized patients.

Philipp Helmer, Sebastian Hottenrott, Kathrin Wienböker, Jürgen Brugger, Christian Stoppe, Benedikt Schmid, Peter Kranke, Patrick Meybohm, Michael Sammeth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Philipp HelmerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany. Helmer_P@ukw.de.
Sebastian HottenrottDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Kathrin WienbökerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Jürgen BruggerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Christian StoppeDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Benedikt SchmidDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Peter KrankeDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Patrick MeybohmDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Michael SammethDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wearables and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies are increasingly incorporated into healthcare, including perioperative settings. These devices offer continuous non-invasive monitoring of vital signs, patient position, and mobilization. Nonetheless, there is currently little information about tolerance and acceptance of wearables in postoperative patients. We therefore assessed opinions and user experience in postoperative patients who used three popular fitness trackers during their entire hospital stay. Specifically, we evaluate the Apple Watch 7, Garmin Fenix 6 Pro, and Withings ScanWatch. We used an investigator-designed patient questionnaire with 11 questions to quantify patient experience and opinions regarding inpatient and home monitoring. Secondarily, we evaluated compliance and the incidence of associated adverse events during daily patient visits. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests. The majority of the answers to the questions (82.1%) were rated positively defined as Likert-Scale Scores 4 or 5 by the 33 analyzed patients, ranging between 72.7 and 97.0% agreement rate. Specific questions related to data sharing for research and overall user experience received high agreement rates (97.0 and 84.8%, respectively). Women reported slightly higher satisfaction with device comfort, as compared to men (LS-Score 4.8 vs. 4.0). No significant differences were found based on the device model or length of hospitalization. The use of wearable devices in healthcare is rated positively by postoperative inpatients, paving the way for future implementation of these devices in healthcare. However, besides validating the measurement accuracy and demonstrating clinical benefits, several regulatory hurdles must be overcome before implementing wearables in routine clinical care.

Indexed as

Fitness TrackersPostoperative CareVital SignsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicPatient SatisfactionPostoperative PeriodSurveys and QuestionnairesWearable Electronic DevicesAnesthesiaComplianceHealth trackerSafetySmartwatchWard monitoringWearables

Identifiers

PMID40050564
PMCPMC12474713

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.