• Users Online: 588
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 65  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 146-152

Use of wireless respiratory rate sensor monitoring during opioid patient-controlled analgesia after gynaecological surgery: A prospective cohort study


1 Department of Women's Anaesthesia, KK Women's and Children's Hospital, Singapore
2 Department of Women's Anaesthesia, KK Women's and Children's Hospital; Anaesthesiology and Perioperative Sciences Academic Clinical Program, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
3 Centre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore

Correspondence Address:
Ban Leong Sng
KK Women's and Children's Hospital, 100 Bukit Timah Road
Singapore
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_1262_20

Rights and Permissions

Background and Aims: Respiratory depression is a rare but serious complication during opioid administration. Therefore, early detection of signs of deterioration is paramount. The current standard of care of using manual intermittent respiratory rate (RR) measurement is labour intensive and inefficient. We evaluated a wireless sensor monitor, Aingeal (Renew Health Ltd, Ireland), to continuously monitor RR, heart rate (HR) and temperature compared to standard clinical measurements. Methods: Patients who underwent major gynaecological operations and received postoperative opioid patient-controlled analgesia were recruited. Patients were connected to the sensor monitor via a central station software platform. The primary outcome was comparison of RR between sensor and nursing monitoring, with secondary outcomes being HR and temperature between two methods. Feedback from patients and healthcare providers was also collected. Bland-Altman analyses were used to compare the vital signs recorded in sensor against those in patient's electronic record. Results: A total of 1121 hours of vital signs data were analysed. Bias for RR was -0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI): -9.39, 7.60) breaths/min between nursing and averaged sensor readings. Bias for heart rate was -1.12 (95% CI: -26.27, 24.03) and bias for temperature was 1.45 (95% CI: -5.67, 2.76) between the two methods. Conclusion: There is satisfactory agreement of RR measurements, as well as HR and temperature measurements, by the wireless sensor monitor with standard clinical intermittent monitoring with overall good user experience.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed322    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded37    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal