Validated Wearable Device Shows Acute Postoperative Changes in Sleep Patterns Consistent With Patient-Reported Outcomes and Progressive Decreases in Device Compliance After Shoulder Surgery

The utility of wearable devices in the perioperative period

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Improved perioperative patient monitoring is a crucial step toward better predicting postoperative outcomes. Wearable devices capable of measuring various health-related metrics represent a novel tool that can assist healthcare providers. However, the literature surrounding wearables is wide-ranging, preventing clinicians from drawing definitive conclusions regarding their utility. This review intends to consolidate the recent literature on perioperative wearables and summarize the most salient information.

RECENT FINDINGS

Wearable devices measuring cardiac output and colonic motility have recently been piloted with mixed results. Novel measurement techniques for established metrics have also been studied, including photoplethysmography devices for heart rate and blood pressure along with resistance thermometers for temperature. Nuanced methods of synthesizing data have been piloted, including machine-learning algorithms for predicting adverse events and trajectory curves for step count progression. Wearable devices are generally well accepted, although adjuvant support systems have improved patient satisfaction.

SUMMARY

Perioperative wearables are valuable tools for tracking postoperative health metrics, predicting adverse events, and improving patient satisfaction. Future research on removing barriers such as technological illiteracy, artifact generation, and false-positive alarms would enable better integration of wearables into the hospital setting.

The Fundamentals and Applications of Wearable Sensor Devices in Sports Medicine: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

To (1) characterize the various forms of wearable sensor devices (WSDs) and (2) review the peer-reviewed literature of applied wearable technology within sports medicine.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed and EMBASE databases, from inception through 2023, was conducted to identify eligible studies using WSDs within sports medicine. Data extraction was performed of study demographics and sensor specifications. Included studies were categorized by application: athletic training, rehabilitation, and research.

RESULTS

In total, 43 studies met criteria for inclusion in this review. Forms of WSDs include pedometers, accelerometers, encoders (consisting of magnetometers and gyroscopes), force sensors, global positioning system trackers, and inertial measurement units. Outcome metrics include step counts; gait, limb motion, and angular positioning; foot and skin pressure; change of direction and inclination, including analysis of both body parts and athletes on a field; displacement and velocity of body segments and joints; heart rate; plethysmography; sport-specific kinematics; range of motion, symmetry, and alignment; head impact; sleep; throwing biomechanics; and kinetic and spatiotemporal running metrics. WSDs are used in athletic training to assess sport-specific biomechanics and workload with a goal of injury prevention and training optimization, as well as for rehabilitation monitoring and research such as for risk predicting and aiding diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

WSDs enable real-time monitoring of human performance across a variety of implementations and settings, allowing collection of metrics otherwise not achievable. WSDs are powerful tools with multiple applications within athletic training, patient rehabilitation, and orthopaedic and sports medicine research.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Wearable technology may represent the missing link to quantitatively addressing return to play and previous performance. WSDs are commercially available and portable adjuncts that allow clinicians, trainers, and individual athletes to monitor biomechanical parameters, workload, and recovery status to better contextualize personalized training, injury risk, and rehabilitation.

Patient-reported outcomes after CAR T-cell therapy in patients with hematological malignancies

The remarkable improvement in survival among individuals with hematological malignancies receiving chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has highlighted the growing unmet need to incorporate patient-centered assessments in management guidelines for these patients. That CAR T-cell therapy is associated with unique toxicities and relatively high symptom burden in the first few weeks after cell infusion is well known. Magnifying the patient's voice by using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) might support personalized intervention in the acute-care setting, optimize the use of medical resources, improve satisfaction with therapy, and enhance survival benefit. However, various factors impede PRO use in routine patient care: (1) the feasibility of PRO assessment during the acute phase of treatment, especially in patients experiencing neurological toxicities, is not well established; (2) although PROs are widely used in drug- development trials, the assessment tools used in clinical trials primarily inform quality-of-life or safety comparisons among study arms and are rarely the proper tools for assessing and capturing clinically meaningful adverse events that should be monitored in routine patient care; (3) PRO data that could guide how best to monitor and capture the delayed effects of CAR T-cell therapy in long-term survivors are limited. There is a pressing need to overcome these barriers to integrating evidence-based PROs into standard-of-care guidelines for patients receiving CAR T-cell therapy. In this review, we present the current state of PRO utilization in CAR T-cell therapy. We also discuss practical approaches and future directions for successful implementation of PROs in the care of patients receiving CAR T-cell therapy.