Perioperative medicine & outcomes
Time to detection of serious adverse events by continuous vital sign monitoring versus clinical practice
An erratum to this article was published (Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, Jan 2025 ↗)
Main finding · Time to SAEResult — go to the resultMedian difference 48.1 h 95% CI 43.0–54.8Authors' conclusion
Continuous vital sign monitoring detects signs of oncoming SAEs in the form of SVD hours before CSD, potentially allowing for earlier and more effective treatments to reduce the extent of SAEs.
Study context
- Population
- Major abdominal surgery patients at the general ward142 in primary analysis
- Participants
- 505 patients
- Exposure
- SVD vs clinical suspicion of deterioration (CSD)
- Outcome
- Time difference between first chart note of CSD and first SVD in patients with a subsequent confirmed SAE during or up to 48 h after end of monitoring
Main finding
Time to SAE
Median difference
48.1 h
95% CI 43.0–54.8
P < 0.001
By group
SVD
42.8
median · IQR 19.8–72.1 · h
CSD
13
median · IQR - 4.8 to 3.5 h · minutes
SVD vs CSD
median difference 48.1 h (95% CI 43.0–54.8); P < 0.001
As reported in the abstract
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Original publication
Time to detection of serious adverse events by continuous vital sign monitoring versus clinical practice. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. Published 28 October 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →