2013JAMA Internal MedicineOpen access

A Prospective Study of Nighttime Vital Sign Monitoring Frequency and Risk of Clinical Deterioration

Jordan C. Yoder, Trevor C. Yuen, Matthew M. Churpek, Vineet M. Arora, Dana P. Edelson

Open full text 73 citations

Abstract

The routine practice of collecting vital signs every 4 hours in hospitalized ward patients has been perpetuated since as early as 1893, but there is little evidence to support this tradition1. Although vital signs can be indicative of impending clinical deterioration, routine nighttime vital sign monitoring adds to the already fragmented sleep of inpatients. Sleep disruptions are prevalent among ward patients and are associated several negative health outcomes, including elevated blood pressures and delirium2,3. Overnight vital sign checks not only are an especially bothersome disruptor but also can deplete crucial health care resources. Track and trigger systems, such as the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), have been used to identify high-risk patients for critical interventions4. The present study investigated whether the MEWS could identify low-risk-patients who might forgo overnight vital sign monitoring.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The routine practice of collecting vital signs every 4 hours in hospitalized ward patients has been perpetuated since as early as 1893, but there is little evidence to support this tradition1. Although vital signs can be indicative of impending clinical deterioration, routine nighttime vital sign monitoring adds to the already fragmented sleep of inpatients. Sleep disruptions are prevalent among ward patients and are associated several negative health outcomes, including elevated blood pressures and delirium2,3. Overnight vital sign checks not only are an especially bothersome disruptor but also can deplete crucial health care resources. Track and trigger systems, such as the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), have been used to identify high-risk patients for critical interventions4. The present study investigated whether the MEWS could identify low-risk-patients who might forgo overnight vital sign monitoring.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 73 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The routine practice of collecting vital signs every 4 hours in hospitalized ward patients has been perpetuated since as early as 1893, but there is little evidence to support this tradition1. Although vital signs can be indicative of impending clinical deterioration, routine nighttime vital sign monitoring adds to the already fragmented sleep of inpatients. Sleep disruptions are prevalent among ward patients and are associated several negative health outcomes, including elevated blood pressures and delirium2,3. Overnight vital sign checks not only are an especially bothersome disruptor but also can deplete crucial health care resources. Track and trigger systems, such as the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), have been used to identify high-risk patients for critical interventions4. The present study investigated whether the MEWS could identify low-risk-patients who might forgo overnight vital sign monitoring.

Key concepts: Medicine, Vital signs, Early warning score, Mews, Warning signs, Intensive care medicine, Sign (mathematics), Emergency medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A Prospective Study of Nighttime Vital Sign Monitoring Frequency and Risk of Clinical Deterioration — Research Paper | ScholarLens