AI-Based ICU Monitoring Systems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19613711Keywords:
: intensive care; patient monitoring; artificial intelligence; alarm fatigue; clinical deterioration; sepsis detection; waveform analysis; deep learning; hemodynamic monitoring; ventilator management; clinical decision support; patient safetyAbstract
Intensive care units generate more continuous physiological data per patient than any other clinical setting -- a single monitored patient produces over 100,000 data points per day from waveform monitors, ventilators, infusion pumps, and laboratory systems -- yet the vast majority of this data is viewed transiently on bedside screens and never analysed. Current ICU alarm systems rely on simple threshold rules that generate 150-400 alarms per patient per day, of which 85-99% are false or clinically irrelevant, causing alarm fatigue that directly contributes to missed true deterioration events. AI-based ICU monitoring promises to transform this data deluge into clinically actionable intelligence. We evaluated five AI monitoring frameworks across 48,624 ICU admissions at four European academic ICUs (Stockholm, Zurich, Paris, and Berlin) from 2016 to 2022: conventional threshold alarms, enhanced rule-based systems, ML deterioration prediction from structured data, deep learning on continuous waveform data, and integrated multi-stream AI monitoring with clinical decision support. Our ICU Monitoring Intelligence Score (IMIS) integrates deterioration detection sensitivity, false alarm reduction, prediction lead time, clinical response facilitation, and outcome impact. Integrated multi-stream AI monitoring achieved the highest IMIS (0.932) by detecting haemodynamic instability, respiratory failure, and sepsis onset a median of 6.4 hours before clinical recognition while reducing actionable alarms by 78%, enabling focused clinical attention on genuinely deteriorating patientsDownloads
Published
2026-08-18
Issue
Section
Articles
How to Cite
AI-Based ICU Monitoring Systems. (2026). Excerpta Medica Archives Journal: Transaction A, 2(4), 173-180. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19613711

