Advertisement

Mobile wireless monitoring system for prehospital emergency care

  • Natasa KoceskaEmail author
  • Radko KomadinaEmail author
  • Monika Simjanoska
  • Bojana Koteska
  • Andrej Strahovnik
  • Anton Jošt
  • Rok Maček
  • Ana Madevska-Bogdanova
  • Vladimir Trajkovik
  • Jurij Franc Tasič
  • Janez Trontelj
Original Article
  • 37 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Latest achievement technologies allow engineers to develop medical systems that medical doctors in the health care system could not imagine years ago. The development of signal theory, intelligent systems, biophysics and extensive collaboration between science and technology researchers and medical professionals, open up the potential for preventive, real-time monitoring of patients. With the recent developments of new methods in medicine, it is also possible to predict the trends of the disease development as well the systemic support in diagnose setting. Within the framework of the needs to track the patient health parameters in the hospital environment or in the case of road accidents, the researchers had to integrate the knowledge and experiences of medical specialists in emergency medicine who have participated in the development of a mobile wireless monitoring system designed for real-time monitoring of victim vital parameters. Emergency medicine responders are first point of care for trauma victim providing prehospital care, including triage and treatment at the scene of incident and transport from the scene to the hospital. Continuous monitoring of life functions allows immediate detection of a deterioration in health status and helps out in carrying out principle of continuous e-triage. In this study, a mobile wireless monitoring system for measuring and recording the vital parameters of the patient was presented and evaluated. Based on the measured values, the system is able to make triage and assign treatment priority for the patient. The system also provides the opportunity to take a picture of the injury, mark the injured body parts, calculate Glasgow Coma Score, or insert/record the medication given to the patient. Evaluation of the system was made using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). In particular we measured: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude, intention to use, patient status and environmental status.

Methods

A functional prototype of a developed wireless sensor-based system was installed at the emergency medical (EM) department, and presented to the participants of this study. Thirty participants, paramedics and doctors from the emergency department participated in the study. Two scenarios common for the prehospital emergency routines were considered for the evaluation. Participants were asked to answer the questions referred to these scenarios by rating each of the items on a 5-point Likert scale.

Results

Path coefficients between each measured variable were calculated. All coefficients were positive, but the statistically significant were only the following: patient status and perceive usefulness (β = 0.284, t = 2.097), environment (both urban a nd rural) and perceive usefulness (β = 0.247, t = 2.570; β = 0.329, t = 2.083, respectively), and perceive usefulness and behavioral intention (β = 0.621 t = 7.269). The variance of intention is 47.9%.

Conclusions

The study results show that the proposed system is well accepted by the EM personnel and can be used as a complementary system in EM department for continuous monitoring of patients’ vital signs.

Keywords

Wireless sensors Vital signs monitoring e-Triage TAM model Prehospital treatment 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research is supported by SIARS, NATO multi-year SPS Project NATO.EAP.SFPP 984753.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

References

  1. 1.
    Sánchez-Mangas R, García-Ferrrer A, de Juan A, Arroyo AM. The probability of death in road traffic accidents. How important is a quick medical response? Accid Anal Prev. 2010;42(4): 1048–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gonzalez RP, et al. Does increased emergency medical services prehospital time affect patient mortality in rural motor vehicle crashes? A statewide analysis. Am J Surg. 2009;197(1):30–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vukmir RB. Survival from prehospital cardiac arrest is critically dependent upon response time. Resuscitation. 2006;69(2):229–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dujić D, Simčič B. Smernice za delovanje sistema nujne medicinske pomoči ob množičnih nesrečah. Ministrstvo za zdravje. 2013. https://www.mz.gov.si/fileadmin/mz.gov.si/pageuploads/kakovost/NMP_2013/mnozicne_nesrece/Smernice_NMP_mnozicne_tisk_2.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2018.
  5. 5.
    Benson M, Koenig KL, Schultz CH. Disaster triage: START, then SAVE-a new method of dynamic triage for victims of a catastrophic earthquake. Prehosp Disaster Med. 1996;11(2):117–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garner A, Nocera A. Sieve, sort or START. Emerg Med. 2001;13:477–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lenquist S. Medical response to major incident and disasters. Berlin: Springer; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wu X, Dunne R, Yu Z, Shi W. STREMS: a smart real-time solution toward enhancing EMS prehospital quality. In: Connected health: applications, systems and engineering technologies (CHASE), 2017 IEEE/ACM international conference. 2017, pp 365–372.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tan TH, Gochoo M, Chen YF, Hu JJ, Chiang JY, Chang CS, Lee MH, Hsu YN, Hsu JC. Ubiquitous emergency medical service system based on wireless biosensors, traffic information, and wireless communication technologies: development and evaluation. Sensors. 2017;17(1):202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chang CS, Tan TH, Chen YF, Huang YF, Lee MH, Hsu JC, Chen HC. Development of a ubiquitous emergency medical service system based on zigbee and 3.5 G wireless communication technologies. In: International Conference on Medical Biometrics 2010 Jun 28. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 201–208.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Amadi-Obi A, Gilligan P, Owens N, et al. Telemedicine in pre-hospital care: a review of telemedicine applications in the pre-hospital environment. Int J Emerg Med. 2014;7:29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu NT, Holcomb JB, Wade CE, Darrah MI, Salinas J. Evaluation of standard versus nonstandard vital signs monitors in the prehospital and emergency departments: results and lessons learned from a trauma patient care protocol. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;77(3 Suppl 2):121–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Almadani B, Bin-Yahya M, Shakshuki EM. E-ambulance: real-time integration platform for heterogeneous medical telemetry system. Procedia Comput Sci. 2015;63:400–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Azizan MH, Lim CS, Go TL, Hatta WALWM, Teoh SS. Simulation of emergency medical services delivery performance based on real map. Int J Eng Technol. 2013; 5(3):2620–27.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    NATO: EADRCC consequence management field exercise BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA 2017. 2017. https://www.webcitation.org/6vkeCIS9r. Accessed 20 Aug 2018.
  16. 16.
    NATO: MnTS multinational telemedicine systems. 2017. https://www.webcitation.org/6vkeQvYCm. Accessed 20 Aug 2018.
  17. 17.
    Abu-Dalbouh HM. A questionnaire approach based on the technology acceptance model for mobile tracking on patient progress applications. J Comput Sci. 2013;9(6):763–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Holden RJ, Karsh BT. The technology acceptance model: its past and its future in health care. J Biomed Inform. 2010;43(1):159–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hu PJ, Chau PY, Sheng ORL, Tam KY. Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. J Manag Inf Syst. 1999;16(2):91–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag Sci. 1989;35(8):982–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: development and test. Decis Sci. 1996;27(3):451–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Computer ScienceUniversity “Goce Delchev”-StipStipMacedonia
  2. 2.General Hospital CeljeCeljeSlovenia
  3. 3.Faculty of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity “Ss Cyril and Methodious”SkopjeMacedonia
  4. 4.Faculty of Electrical EngineeringUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia
  5. 5.Medical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations