ICU sedation, delirium & recovery
A Wireless Photoplethysmography Chest Patch for Continuous Vital Sign Monitoring: A Clinical Validation Study in Intensive Care Patients
Authors' conclusion
Overall agreement was variable, with wide limits of agreement and a substantial proportion of measurements outside predefined thresholds.
Study context
- Population
- ICU patients1931.8 monitoring hours
- Participants
- 32 patients
- Comparison
- Chest patch vs Reference monitor
- Outcome
- Agreement (bias and limits of agreement) between biosensor and reference monitor for five vital signs
Methodological detailsBland-Altman analysis for repeated measurements, Deming regression, Clarke Error Grid analysis
- Bland-Altman analysis for repeated measurements
- Deming regression
- Clarke Error Grid analysis
Performance
As reported in the abstract
Agreement of wearable biosensor with reference bedside monitor (Bland-Altman bias, LoA)
- Heart rate bias, beats per minute (LoA −17.06 to 17.38)
- 0.16
- Heart rate, measurements exceeding 10% threshold
- 18.8%
- Heart rate, Clarke Error Grid zones D-E
- 0.42%
- Respiratory rate bias, breaths per minute (LoA −6.78 to 14.31)
- 3.77
- Respiratory rate, measurements exceeding 10% threshold
- 61.4%
- Respiratory rate, Clarke Error Grid zones D-E
- 18.6%
- SBP bias, mmHg
- −4.69
- Oxygen saturation bias
- −1.34%
- Temperature bias
- −0.29°C
Original publication
A Wireless Photoplethysmography Chest Patch for Continuous Vital Sign Monitoring: A Clinical Validation Study in Intensive Care Patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. Published 26 April 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →