Effectiveness and safety of pulse oximetry in remote patient monitoring of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review
File(s)1-s2.0-S2589750021002764-main.pdf (595.96 KB)
Published version
Author(s)
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has led health systems to increase the use of tools for monitoring and triaging patients remotely. This study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of pulse oximetry in Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) of COVID-19 patients at home. We conducted a systematic review,
searching five databases, Medline, Embase, Global Health, medRxiv, and bioRxiv, from inception to April 15, 2021. We included feasibility studies, clinical trials, observational studies, including preprints. We found 561 studies, of which 13 were included in our synthesis. The final studies were all observational cohorts and involved a total of 2,908 participants. A meta-analysis was not feasible due to the heterogeneity of the outcomes reported in the included studies.
Our review confirmed the safety and potential of using pulse oximetry in monitoring COVID-19 patients at home. It can potentially save hospital resources for those who may benefit most from care escalation. However, we could not identify explicit evidence on the impact on health outcomes compared with other monitoring models that have not used pulse oximetry. Based on our findings, we make 11 recommendations and three measures for setting up an RPM system using pulse oximetry.
searching five databases, Medline, Embase, Global Health, medRxiv, and bioRxiv, from inception to April 15, 2021. We included feasibility studies, clinical trials, observational studies, including preprints. We found 561 studies, of which 13 were included in our synthesis. The final studies were all observational cohorts and involved a total of 2,908 participants. A meta-analysis was not feasible due to the heterogeneity of the outcomes reported in the included studies.
Our review confirmed the safety and potential of using pulse oximetry in monitoring COVID-19 patients at home. It can potentially save hospital resources for those who may benefit most from care escalation. However, we could not identify explicit evidence on the impact on health outcomes compared with other monitoring models that have not used pulse oximetry. Based on our findings, we make 11 recommendations and three measures for setting up an RPM system using pulse oximetry.
Date Issued
2022-04
Date Acceptance
2021-11-29
Citation
The Lancet Digital Health, 2022, 4 (4), pp.e279-e289
ISSN
2589-7500
Publisher
Elsevier
Start Page
e279
End Page
e289
Journal / Book Title
The Lancet Digital Health
Volume
4
Issue
4
Copyright Statement
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Under a Creative Commons license.
License URL
Sponsor
National Institute for Health Research
Identifier
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589750021002764?via%3Dihub
Grant Number
RDE07 79560
Subjects
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Medical Informatics
Medicine, General & Internal
General & Internal Medicine
PRIMARY-CARE
TECHNOLOGY
SERVICE
IMPACT
COVID-19
Humans
Monitoring, Physiologic
Oximetry
Pandemics
Humans
Oximetry
Monitoring, Physiologic
Pandemics
COVID-19
Publication Status
Published
Date Publish Online
2022-03-22