Back

Identifying clinician perceived priorities for a real-time wearable system for in-hospital monitoring: findings and evolutions following the COVID-19 pandemic

Vollam, S.; Roman, C.; King, E.; Tarassenko, L.

2026-04-24 health systems and quality improvement
10.64898/2026.04.21.26350610 medRxiv
Show abstract

A Wearable Monitoring System (WMS), comprising a chest patch, wrist-worn pulse oximeter, and arm-worn blood pressure device, was developed in preparation for a pilot Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) on a UK surgical ward. The system was designed to support continuous physiological monitoring and early detection of deterioration. An initial prototype user interface was developed by the research team based on prior clinical experience and engineering knowledge. To ensure suitability for clinical practice, iterative user-centred refinement was undertaken through a series of clinician focus groups and wearability assessments. Six focus groups were conducted between November 2019 and May 2021 involving multidisciplinary healthcare professionals. Feedback from these sessions informed successive interface and system modifications. System development spanned the COVID-19 pandemic, during which the WMS was rapidly adapted and deployed to support clinical care on isolation wards. Feedback obtained during this period was incorporated into later versions of the system and provided a unique opportunity to examine changes in clinician priorities under pandemic conditions. Clinicians consistently prioritised alert visibility, alarm fatigue mitigation, parameter flexibility, and centralised monitoring. Notably, preferences regarding alert modality and access mechanisms evolved over time: early enthusiasm for mobile or smartphone-type devices shifted towards a preference for fixed, ward-based displays and audible alerts at the nurses station following pandemic deployment. Building on previous wearability testing in healthy volunteers, wearability testing using a validated questionnaire was completed by 169 patient participants during the RCT. The chest patch and pulse oximeter demonstrated high tolerability, whereas the blood pressure cuff showed poor wearability and was removed from the final system. These findings demonstrate the importance of iterative, clinician-led design for wearable WMS and highlight how extreme clinical contexts such as the COVID-19 pandemic can significantly reshape perceived requirements for safety-critical monitoring technologies.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.5%
2
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
3
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
4
Physiological Measurement
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.8%
5
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.9%
7
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.0%
8
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.7%
9
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
10
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
11
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
12
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
13
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.8%
14
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
15
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
16
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
17
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
18
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
19
BMJ Paediatrics Open
21 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
20
Patterns
70 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%