Aim: This review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of evidence for the use of clinical and quality dashboards in health care environments. Methods:A literature search was performed for the dates 1996 to 2012 on CINAHL, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, Science Direct and ACM Digital Library. A citation search and a hand search of relevant papers were also conducted.Results: One hundred and twenty two full text papers were retrieved of which 11 were included in the review. There was considerable heterogeneity in implementation setting, dashboard users and indicators used. There was evidence that in contexts where dashboards were easily accessible to clinicians (such as in the form of a screen saver) their use was associated with improved care processes and patient outcomes. Conclusion:There is some evidence that implementing clinical and/or quality dashboards that provide immediate access to information for clinicians can improve adherence to quality guidelines and may help improve patient outcomes. However, further high quality detailed research studies need to be conducted to obtain evidence of their efficacy and establish guidelines for their design.4

Background

BackgroundVital signs monitoring is a universal tool for the detection of postoperative complications; however, unwell patients can be missed between traditional observation rounds. New remote monitoring technologies promise to convey the benefits of continuous monitoring to patients in general wards.ObjectiveThe aim of this pilot study was to evaluate whether continuous remote vital signs monitoring is a practical and acceptable way of monitoring surgical patients and to optimize the delivery of a definitive trial.MethodsWe performed a prospective, cluster-randomized, parallel-group, unblinded, controlled pilot study. Patients admitted to 2 surgical wards at a large tertiary hospital received either continuous and intermittent vital signs monitoring or intermittent monitoring alone using an early warning score system. Continuous monitoring was provided by a wireless patch, worn on the patient’s chest, with data transmitted wirelessly every 2 minutes to a central monitoring station or a mobile device carried by the patient’s nurse. The primary outcome measure was time to administration of antibiotics in sepsis. The secondary outcome measures included the length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission rate, mortality, and patient acceptability.ResultsOverall, 226 patients were randomized between January and June 2017. Of 226 patients, 140 were randomized to continuous remote monitoring and 86 to intermittent monitoring alone. On average, patients receiving continuous monitoring were administered antibiotics faster after evidence of sepsis (626 minutes, n=22, 95% CI 431.7-820.3 minutes vs 1012.8 minutes, n=12, 95% CI 425.0-1600.6 minutes), had a shorter average length of hospital stay (13.3 days, 95% CI 11.3-15.3 days vs 14.6 days, 95% CI 11.5-17.7 days), and were less likely to require readmission within 30 days of discharge (11.4%, 95% CI 6.16-16.7 vs 20.9%, 95% CI 12.3-29.5). Wide CIs suggest these differences are not statistically significant. Patients found the monitoring device to be acceptable in terms of comfort and perceived an enhanced sense of safety, despite 24% discontinuing the intervention early.ConclusionsRemote continuous vital signs monitoring on surgical wards is practical and acceptable to patients. Large, well-controlled studies in high-risk populations are required to determine whether the observed trends translate into a significant benefit for continuous over intermittent monitoring.Trial RegistrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN60999823; http://www.isrctn.com /ISRCTN60999823 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73ikP6OQz)

-Thirty-eight studies were included in the review. The mean diagnostic concordance of WSI and LM, weighted by the number of cases per study, was 92.4%. The weighted mean κ coefficient between WSI and LM was 0.75, signifying substantial agreement. Of the 30 studies quoting percentage concordance, 18 (60%) showed a concordance of 90% or greater, of which 10 (33%) showed a concordance of 95% or greater. This review found evidence to support a high level of diagnostic concordance. However, there were few studies, many were small, and they varied in quality, suggesting that further validation studies are still needed.

Continuous vital signs monitoring outside the critical care setting is feasible and may provide a benefit in terms of improved patient outcomes and cost efficiency. Large, well-controlled studies in high-risk populations are required to evaluate the clinical benefit of continuous monitoring systems.