The Experts below are selected from a list of 5337 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Tom Pedersen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Cochrane Library - Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan, Amanda Nicholson, Andrew F Smith, Sharon R Lewis
    Abstract:

    Background This is an update of a review last published in Issue 9, 2009, of The Cochrane Library. Pulse oximetry is used extensively in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. Objectives To study the use of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use.The following hypotheses were tested.1. Use of pulse oximetry is associated with improvement in the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia.2. Early detection and treatment of hypoxaemia reduce morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.3. Use of pulse oximetry per se reduces morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.4. Use of pulse oximetry reduces unplanned respiratory admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), decreases the length of ICU readmission or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), CINAHL (1982 to June 2013), ISI Web of Science (1956 to June 2013), LILACS (1982 to June 2013) and databases of ongoing trials; we also checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. The original search was performed in January 2005, and a previous update was performed in May 2009. Selection criteria We included all controlled trials that randomly assigned participants to pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period and intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Main results The last update of the review identified five eligible studies. The updated search found one study that is awaiting assessment but no additional eligible studies. We considered studies with data from a total of 22,992 participants that were eligible for analysis. These studies gave insufficient detail on the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment. It was impossible for study personnel to be blinded to participant allocation in the study, as they needed to be able to respond to oximetry readings. Appropriate steps were taken to minimize detection bias for hypoxaemia and complication outcomes. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. A single study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of participants in the oximetry group and in 9.4% of those in the control group. No statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological or infectious complications were detected in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and equal numbers of in-hospital deaths were reported in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery; however, routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an ICU and did not decrease overall mortality. Authors' conclusions These studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective study results, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce transfer to the ICU and did not decrease mortality, and it is unclear whether any real benefit was derived from the application of this technology for patients recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan, Amanda Nicholson, Andrew F Smith, Sharon R Lewis
    Abstract:

    Background This is an update of a review last published in Issue 9, 2009, of The Cochrane Library. Pulse oximetry is used extensively in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. Objectives To study the use of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use.The following hypotheses were tested.1. Use of pulse oximetry is associated with improvement in the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia.2. Early detection and treatment of hypoxaemia reduce morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.3. Use of pulse oximetry per se reduces morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.4. Use of pulse oximetry reduces unplanned respiratory admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), decreases the length of ICU readmission or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), CINAHL (1982 to June 2013), ISI Web of Science (1956 to June 2013), LILACS (1982 to June 2013) and databases of ongoing trials; we also checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. The original search was performed in January 2005, and a previous update was performed in May 2009. Selection criteria We included all controlled trials that randomly assigned participants to pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period and intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Main results The last update of the review identified five eligible studies. The updated search found one study that is awaiting assessment but no additional eligible studies. We considered studies with data from a total of 22,992 participants that were eligible for analysis. These studies gave insufficient detail on the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment. It was impossible for study personnel to be blinded to participant allocation in the study, as they needed to be able to respond to oximetry readings. Appropriate steps were taken to minimize detection bias for hypoxaemia and complication outcomes. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. A single study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of participants in the oximetry group and in 9.4% of those in the control group. No statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological or infectious complications were detected in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and equal numbers of in-hospital deaths were reported in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery; however, routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an ICU and did not decrease overall mortality. Authors' conclusions These studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective study results, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce transfer to the ICU and did not decrease mortality, and it is unclear whether any real benefit was derived from the application of this technology for patients recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan
    Abstract:

    Pulse oximetry is extensively used in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling an early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications, and cognitive dysfunction. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry and to clearly identify the adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by the use of pulse oximetry. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2009), EMBASE (1980 to May 2009), CINAHL (1982 to May 2009), ISI Web of Science (1956 to May 2009), LILACS (1982 to May 2009), and databases of ongoing trials; and checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. We included all controlled trials that randomized patients to either pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Two authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period, and intra- or postoperative mortality. Searching identified five reports. We considered the studies with data from a total of 22,992 patients that were eligible for analysis. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. The one study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of the patients in the oximetry group and in 9.4% in the control group. No statistically significant differences were detected in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurologic, or infectious complications in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and an equal number of in-hospital deaths was registered in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery, however routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an intensive care unit (ICU) or overall mortality. The studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we have found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective results of the studies, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness, and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce either transfer to ICU or mortality, and it is unclear if there is any real benefit from the application of this technology in patients who are recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • Does Perioperative pulse oximetry improve outcome? Seeking the best available evidence to answer the clinical question.
    Best practice & research. Clinical anaesthesiology, 2005
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen
    Abstract:

    The aim of this chapter is to clarify the effect of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry and to identify the adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use. Trials were identified by computerized searches of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE, and by checking the reference lists of trials and review articles. All controlled trials that randomized patients to either pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period, including the operating and recovery room, were included in the search. Pulse oximetry Monitoring was shown to substantially reduce the extent of Perioperative hypoxaemia, enabling the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia and related respiratory events, and promoting several changes in patient care. The implementation of Perioperative pulse oximetry Monitoring does not significantly reduce the number of postoperative complications, but the question remains whether pulse oximetry can improve outcomes in other situations. Pulse oximetry has been adopted all over the world in clinical practice as a tool that guides anaesthesiologists in the daily management of patients: in teaching situations, in emergencies, and especially in the care of children. Given the relatively small number of patients studied in these trials and the rare events being sought, the studies of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry were not able to show an improvement in the outcomes studied.

  • Pulse oximetry in Perioperative Monitoring
    Ugeskrift for laeger, 2003
    Co-Authors: Anne Sofie Konstantin Poulsen, Tom Pedersen
    Abstract:

    BACKGROUND Monitoring with pulse oximetry might improve patient outcome by enabling an early diagnosis and consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomised clinical trials of pulse oximetry have been performed during anaesthesia and in the recovery room which describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. OBJECTIVES To study the effect of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify the adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by the use of pulse oximetry. SEARCH STRATEGY Trials were identified by computerised searches of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and by checking the reference lists of trials and review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA All controlled trials that randomised patients to either pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period, including the operating and recovery room. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We collected data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period, intra- or postoperative mortality, and duration of recovery or intensive care stay. Formal statistical synthesis of individual trials was not performed in view of the variety of outcomes studied. MAIN RESULTS Searching identified six reports; four studies with data from a total of 21,773 patients were considered eligible for analysis. Only two studies specifically addressed the outcomes in question; both found no effect on the rate of postoperative complications using Perioperative pulse oximetry. Two studies used hypoxaemia detectable by pulse oximetry to assess the value of Perioperative Monitoring, although outcomes were not given. It was found that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group both in the operating theratre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5-3 times less. The postoperative cognitive function using the Wechsler memory scale and continuous reaction time was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. The other study showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of the patients in the oximetry group and in 9.4% in the control group. The two groups did not differ in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurologic, or infectious complications. The duration of hospital stay was a median of 5 days in both groups, and an equal number of in-hospital deaths was registered in the two groups. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS The studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we have found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia. The conflicting subjective and objective results of the studies, despite an intense, methodical collection of data from a relatively large population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency.

A M Moller - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Cochrane Library - Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan, Amanda Nicholson, Andrew F Smith, Sharon R Lewis
    Abstract:

    Background This is an update of a review last published in Issue 9, 2009, of The Cochrane Library. Pulse oximetry is used extensively in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. Objectives To study the use of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use.The following hypotheses were tested.1. Use of pulse oximetry is associated with improvement in the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia.2. Early detection and treatment of hypoxaemia reduce morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.3. Use of pulse oximetry per se reduces morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.4. Use of pulse oximetry reduces unplanned respiratory admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), decreases the length of ICU readmission or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), CINAHL (1982 to June 2013), ISI Web of Science (1956 to June 2013), LILACS (1982 to June 2013) and databases of ongoing trials; we also checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. The original search was performed in January 2005, and a previous update was performed in May 2009. Selection criteria We included all controlled trials that randomly assigned participants to pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period and intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Main results The last update of the review identified five eligible studies. The updated search found one study that is awaiting assessment but no additional eligible studies. We considered studies with data from a total of 22,992 participants that were eligible for analysis. These studies gave insufficient detail on the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment. It was impossible for study personnel to be blinded to participant allocation in the study, as they needed to be able to respond to oximetry readings. Appropriate steps were taken to minimize detection bias for hypoxaemia and complication outcomes. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. A single study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of participants in the oximetry group and in 9.4% of those in the control group. No statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological or infectious complications were detected in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and equal numbers of in-hospital deaths were reported in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery; however, routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an ICU and did not decrease overall mortality. Authors' conclusions These studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective study results, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce transfer to the ICU and did not decrease mortality, and it is unclear whether any real benefit was derived from the application of this technology for patients recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan, Amanda Nicholson, Andrew F Smith, Sharon R Lewis
    Abstract:

    Background This is an update of a review last published in Issue 9, 2009, of The Cochrane Library. Pulse oximetry is used extensively in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. Objectives To study the use of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use.The following hypotheses were tested.1. Use of pulse oximetry is associated with improvement in the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia.2. Early detection and treatment of hypoxaemia reduce morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.3. Use of pulse oximetry per se reduces morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.4. Use of pulse oximetry reduces unplanned respiratory admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), decreases the length of ICU readmission or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), CINAHL (1982 to June 2013), ISI Web of Science (1956 to June 2013), LILACS (1982 to June 2013) and databases of ongoing trials; we also checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. The original search was performed in January 2005, and a previous update was performed in May 2009. Selection criteria We included all controlled trials that randomly assigned participants to pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period and intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Main results The last update of the review identified five eligible studies. The updated search found one study that is awaiting assessment but no additional eligible studies. We considered studies with data from a total of 22,992 participants that were eligible for analysis. These studies gave insufficient detail on the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment. It was impossible for study personnel to be blinded to participant allocation in the study, as they needed to be able to respond to oximetry readings. Appropriate steps were taken to minimize detection bias for hypoxaemia and complication outcomes. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. A single study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of participants in the oximetry group and in 9.4% of those in the control group. No statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological or infectious complications were detected in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and equal numbers of in-hospital deaths were reported in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery; however, routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an ICU and did not decrease overall mortality. Authors' conclusions These studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective study results, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce transfer to the ICU and did not decrease mortality, and it is unclear whether any real benefit was derived from the application of this technology for patients recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan
    Abstract:

    Pulse oximetry is extensively used in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling an early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications, and cognitive dysfunction. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry and to clearly identify the adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by the use of pulse oximetry. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2009), EMBASE (1980 to May 2009), CINAHL (1982 to May 2009), ISI Web of Science (1956 to May 2009), LILACS (1982 to May 2009), and databases of ongoing trials; and checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. We included all controlled trials that randomized patients to either pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Two authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period, and intra- or postoperative mortality. Searching identified five reports. We considered the studies with data from a total of 22,992 patients that were eligible for analysis. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. The one study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of the patients in the oximetry group and in 9.4% in the control group. No statistically significant differences were detected in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurologic, or infectious complications in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and an equal number of in-hospital deaths was registered in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery, however routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an intensive care unit (ICU) or overall mortality. The studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we have found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective results of the studies, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness, and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce either transfer to ICU or mortality, and it is unclear if there is any real benefit from the application of this technology in patients who are recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring: systematic review of randomized, controlled trials.
    Anesthesia and analgesia, 2003
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Bente D. Pedersen
    Abstract:

    Monitoring with pulse oximetry might improve patient outcome by enabling an early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might otherwise cause postoperative complications or even death. The aim of the study was to clarify the effect of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry and to identify the adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use. Trials were identified by computerized searches of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and by checking the reference lists of trials and review articles. All controlled trials that randomized patients to either pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period, including in the operating and recovery room, were included in the study. The search identified six reports. Of these 6 reports, 4 studies with data from 21,773 patients were considered eligible for analysis. Two studies specifically addressed the outcomes in question; both found no effect on the rate of postoperative complications using Perioperative pulse oximetry. Hypoxemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group both in the operating room and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5-3 times less. There were postoperative complications in 10% of the patients in the oximetry group and in 9.4% in the control group. The duration of hospital stay was a median of 5 days in both groups, and an equal number of in-hospital deaths was registered in both groups. The studies confirmed that pulse oximetry could detect hypoxemia and related events. However, given the relatively small number of patients studied and the rare events being sought, the studies were not able to show an improvement in various outcomes.

  • Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2001
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, P Pedersen, A M Moller
    Abstract:

    Monitoring with pulse oximetry might improve patient outcome by enabling an early diagnosis and consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomised clinical trials of pulse oximetry have been performed during anaesthesia and in the recovery room which describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. To study the effect of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify the adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by the use of pulse oximetry. Trials were identified by computerised searches of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and by checking the reference lists of trials and review articles. All controlled trials that randomised patients to either pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period, including the operating and recovery room. We collected data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period, intra- or postoperative mortality, and duration of recovery or intensive care stay. Formal statistical synthesis of individual trials was not performed in view of the variety of outcomes studied. Searching identified six reports; four studies with data from a total of 21,773 patients were considered eligible for analysis. Only two studies specifically addressed the outcomes in question; both found no effect on the rate of postoperative complications using Perioperative pulse oximetry. Two studies used hypoxaemia detectable by pulse oximetry to assess the value of Perioperative Monitoring, although outcomes were not given. It was found that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5-3 times less. The postoperative cognitive function using the Wechsler memory scale and continuous reaction time was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. The other study showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of the patients in the oximetry group and in 9.4% in the control group. The two groups did not differ in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurologic, or infectious complications. The duration of hospital stay was a median of 5 days in both groups, and an equal number of in-hospital deaths was registered in the two groups. The studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we have found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia. The conflicting subjective and objective results of the studies, despite an intense, methodical collection of data from a relatively large population, indicates that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency.

Karen Hovhannisyan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan, Amanda Nicholson, Andrew F Smith, Sharon R Lewis
    Abstract:

    Background This is an update of a review last published in Issue 9, 2009, of The Cochrane Library. Pulse oximetry is used extensively in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. Objectives To study the use of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use.The following hypotheses were tested.1. Use of pulse oximetry is associated with improvement in the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia.2. Early detection and treatment of hypoxaemia reduce morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.3. Use of pulse oximetry per se reduces morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.4. Use of pulse oximetry reduces unplanned respiratory admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), decreases the length of ICU readmission or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), CINAHL (1982 to June 2013), ISI Web of Science (1956 to June 2013), LILACS (1982 to June 2013) and databases of ongoing trials; we also checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. The original search was performed in January 2005, and a previous update was performed in May 2009. Selection criteria We included all controlled trials that randomly assigned participants to pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period and intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Main results The last update of the review identified five eligible studies. The updated search found one study that is awaiting assessment but no additional eligible studies. We considered studies with data from a total of 22,992 participants that were eligible for analysis. These studies gave insufficient detail on the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment. It was impossible for study personnel to be blinded to participant allocation in the study, as they needed to be able to respond to oximetry readings. Appropriate steps were taken to minimize detection bias for hypoxaemia and complication outcomes. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. A single study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of participants in the oximetry group and in 9.4% of those in the control group. No statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological or infectious complications were detected in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and equal numbers of in-hospital deaths were reported in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery; however, routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an ICU and did not decrease overall mortality. Authors' conclusions These studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective study results, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce transfer to the ICU and did not decrease mortality, and it is unclear whether any real benefit was derived from the application of this technology for patients recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • The Cochrane Library - Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan, Amanda Nicholson, Andrew F Smith, Sharon R Lewis
    Abstract:

    Background This is an update of a review last published in Issue 9, 2009, of The Cochrane Library. Pulse oximetry is used extensively in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. Objectives To study the use of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use.The following hypotheses were tested.1. Use of pulse oximetry is associated with improvement in the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia.2. Early detection and treatment of hypoxaemia reduce morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.3. Use of pulse oximetry per se reduces morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.4. Use of pulse oximetry reduces unplanned respiratory admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), decreases the length of ICU readmission or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), CINAHL (1982 to June 2013), ISI Web of Science (1956 to June 2013), LILACS (1982 to June 2013) and databases of ongoing trials; we also checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. The original search was performed in January 2005, and a previous update was performed in May 2009. Selection criteria We included all controlled trials that randomly assigned participants to pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period and intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Main results The last update of the review identified five eligible studies. The updated search found one study that is awaiting assessment but no additional eligible studies. We considered studies with data from a total of 22,992 participants that were eligible for analysis. These studies gave insufficient detail on the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment. It was impossible for study personnel to be blinded to participant allocation in the study, as they needed to be able to respond to oximetry readings. Appropriate steps were taken to minimize detection bias for hypoxaemia and complication outcomes. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. A single study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of participants in the oximetry group and in 9.4% of those in the control group. No statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological or infectious complications were detected in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and equal numbers of in-hospital deaths were reported in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery; however, routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an ICU and did not decrease overall mortality. Authors' conclusions These studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective study results, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce transfer to the ICU and did not decrease mortality, and it is unclear whether any real benefit was derived from the application of this technology for patients recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan
    Abstract:

    Pulse oximetry is extensively used in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling an early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications, and cognitive dysfunction. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry and to clearly identify the adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by the use of pulse oximetry. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2009), EMBASE (1980 to May 2009), CINAHL (1982 to May 2009), ISI Web of Science (1956 to May 2009), LILACS (1982 to May 2009), and databases of ongoing trials; and checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. We included all controlled trials that randomized patients to either pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Two authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period, and intra- or postoperative mortality. Searching identified five reports. We considered the studies with data from a total of 22,992 patients that were eligible for analysis. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. The one study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of the patients in the oximetry group and in 9.4% in the control group. No statistically significant differences were detected in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurologic, or infectious complications in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and an equal number of in-hospital deaths was registered in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery, however routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an intensive care unit (ICU) or overall mortality. The studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we have found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective results of the studies, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness, and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce either transfer to ICU or mortality, and it is unclear if there is any real benefit from the application of this technology in patients who are recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

Sharon R Lewis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Cochrane Library - Pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring.
    The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan, Amanda Nicholson, Andrew F Smith, Sharon R Lewis
    Abstract:

    Background This is an update of a review last published in Issue 9, 2009, of The Cochrane Library. Pulse oximetry is used extensively in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. Objectives To study the use of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use.The following hypotheses were tested.1. Use of pulse oximetry is associated with improvement in the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia.2. Early detection and treatment of hypoxaemia reduce morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.3. Use of pulse oximetry per se reduces morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.4. Use of pulse oximetry reduces unplanned respiratory admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), decreases the length of ICU readmission or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), CINAHL (1982 to June 2013), ISI Web of Science (1956 to June 2013), LILACS (1982 to June 2013) and databases of ongoing trials; we also checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. The original search was performed in January 2005, and a previous update was performed in May 2009. Selection criteria We included all controlled trials that randomly assigned participants to pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period and intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Main results The last update of the review identified five eligible studies. The updated search found one study that is awaiting assessment but no additional eligible studies. We considered studies with data from a total of 22,992 participants that were eligible for analysis. These studies gave insufficient detail on the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment. It was impossible for study personnel to be blinded to participant allocation in the study, as they needed to be able to respond to oximetry readings. Appropriate steps were taken to minimize detection bias for hypoxaemia and complication outcomes. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. A single study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of participants in the oximetry group and in 9.4% of those in the control group. No statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological or infectious complications were detected in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and equal numbers of in-hospital deaths were reported in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery; however, routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an ICU and did not decrease overall mortality. Authors' conclusions These studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective study results, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce transfer to the ICU and did not decrease mortality, and it is unclear whether any real benefit was derived from the application of this technology for patients recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

  • pulse oximetry for Perioperative Monitoring
    Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014
    Co-Authors: Tom Pedersen, A M Moller, Karen Hovhannisyan, Amanda Nicholson, Andrew F Smith, Sharon R Lewis
    Abstract:

    Background This is an update of a review last published in Issue 9, 2009, of The Cochrane Library. Pulse oximetry is used extensively in the Perioperative period and might improve patient outcomes by enabling early diagnosis and, consequently, correction of Perioperative events that might cause postoperative complications or even death. Only a few randomized clinical trials of pulse oximetry during anaesthesia and in the recovery room have been performed that describe Perioperative hypoxaemic events, postoperative cardiopulmonary complications and cognitive dysfunction. Objectives To study the use of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry to clearly identify adverse outcomes that might be prevented or improved by its use.The following hypotheses were tested.1. Use of pulse oximetry is associated with improvement in the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia.2. Early detection and treatment of hypoxaemia reduce morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.3. Use of pulse oximetry per se reduces morbidity and mortality in the Perioperative period.4. Use of pulse oximetry reduces unplanned respiratory admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), decreases the length of ICU readmission or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2013), EMBASE (1980 to June 2013), CINAHL (1982 to June 2013), ISI Web of Science (1956 to June 2013), LILACS (1982 to June 2013) and databases of ongoing trials; we also checked the reference lists of trials and review articles. The original search was performed in January 2005, and a previous update was performed in May 2009. Selection criteria We included all controlled trials that randomly assigned participants to pulse oximetry or no pulse oximetry during the Perioperative period. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed data in relation to events detectable by pulse oximetry, any serious complications that occurred during anaesthesia or in the postoperative period and intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Main results The last update of the review identified five eligible studies. The updated search found one study that is awaiting assessment but no additional eligible studies. We considered studies with data from a total of 22,992 participants that were eligible for analysis. These studies gave insufficient detail on the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment. It was impossible for study personnel to be blinded to participant allocation in the study, as they needed to be able to respond to oximetry readings. Appropriate steps were taken to minimize detection bias for hypoxaemia and complication outcomes. Results indicated that hypoxaemia was reduced in the pulse oximetry group, both in the operating theatre and in the recovery room. During observation in the recovery room, the incidence of hypoxaemia in the pulse oximetry group was 1.5 to three times less. Postoperative cognitive function was independent of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry. A single study in general surgery showed that postoperative complications occurred in 10% of participants in the oximetry group and in 9.4% of those in the control group. No statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological or infectious complications were detected in the two groups. The duration of hospital stay was a median of five days in both groups, and equal numbers of in-hospital deaths were reported in the two groups. Continuous pulse oximetry has the potential to increase vigilance and decrease pulmonary complications after cardiothoracic surgery; however, routine continuous Monitoring did not reduce transfer to an ICU and did not decrease overall mortality. Authors' conclusions These studies confirmed that pulse oximetry can detect hypoxaemia and related events. However, we found no evidence that pulse oximetry affects the outcome of anaesthesia for patients. The conflicting subjective and objective study results, despite an intense methodical collection of data from a relatively large general surgery population, indicate that the value of Perioperative Monitoring with pulse oximetry is questionable in relation to improved reliable outcomes, effectiveness and efficiency. Routine continuous pulse oximetry Monitoring did not reduce transfer to the ICU and did not decrease mortality, and it is unclear whether any real benefit was derived from the application of this technology for patients recovering from cardiothoracic surgery in a general care area.

P. W. H. E. Vriens - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Perioperative Monitoring of inguinal hernia patients with a smartphone application
    Hernia, 2020
    Co-Authors: L. Hout, W. J. V. Bökkerink, M. S. Ibelings, P. W. H. E. Vriens
    Abstract:

    Introduction Patient Reported Outcomes have become standard in the evaluation of inguinal hernia repair. However, the chosen outcomes remain heterogeneous and the measurements time-consuming or inadequate. Perioperative measurement of pain and recovery could benefit from the contemporary possibilities that mobile health applications offer. Methods An application for smartphones and tablets was developed using the twitch crowdsourcing concept, classical questionnaires, experiences from randomised clinical trials, and patients’ input. Results Dichotomous questions and numeric rating scales, both pre- and post-operative, were implemented in the freely available Q1.6 application. Content, timing and frequencies were adapted to the inguinal hernia patient’s daily life and assumed recovery. Certain combinations of answers were set as alert notifications to detect adverse events. Data are displayed on a web-based dashboard enabling real-time Monitoring. Legal aspects were examined and taken into account. Discussion The Q1.6 inguinal hernia app is an innovative tool for Perioperative Monitoring of pain and recovery of inguinal hernia patients. Previous limitations of classical measurements such as a large heterogeneity, retrospective data recording and different forms of bias can be eliminated. The `big data´ generated in this manner might be used for large-scale research to improve inguinal hernia surgery. The Q1.6 platform is not only hernia specific; it is also an innovative tool to measure PROs in any other domain.

  • Perioperative Monitoring of inguinal hernia patients with a smartphone application.
    Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2019
    Co-Authors: L. Van Hout, W. J. V. Bökkerink, M. S. Ibelings, P. W. H. E. Vriens
    Abstract:

    Patient Reported Outcomes have become standard in the evaluation of inguinal hernia repair. However, the chosen outcomes remain heterogeneous and the measurements time-consuming or inadequate. Perioperative measurement of pain and recovery could benefit from the contemporary possibilities that mobile health applications offer. An application for smartphones and tablets was developed using the twitch crowdsourcing concept, classical questionnaires, experiences from randomised clinical trials, and patients’ input. Dichotomous questions and numeric rating scales, both pre- and post-operative, were implemented in the freely available Q1.6 application. Content, timing and frequencies were adapted to the inguinal hernia patient’s daily life and assumed recovery. Certain combinations of answers were set as alert notifications to detect adverse events. Data are displayed on a web-based dashboard enabling real-time Monitoring. Legal aspects were examined and taken into account. The Q1.6 inguinal hernia app is an innovative tool for Perioperative Monitoring of pain and recovery of inguinal hernia patients. Previous limitations of classical measurements such as a large heterogeneity, retrospective data recording and different forms of bias can be eliminated. The `big data´ generated in this manner might be used for large-scale research to improve inguinal hernia surgery. The Q1.6 platform is not only hernia specific; it is also an innovative tool to measure PROs in any other domain.