Real-Time Monitoring Systems in ICU Settings

Authors

  • Marco Horvath Author
  • Eva Novak Author
  • Andreas Rossi Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19542516

Keywords:

ICU monitoring; Clinical surveillance; Alarm fatigue; Anomaly detection; Early warning systems; Patient deterioration; Time-series analysis; Clinical decision support; Multi-organ failure prediction

Abstract

Intensive care units (ICUs) generate over 1,500 data points per patient per day from continuous physiological monitors, ventilators, infusion pumps, and laboratory systems, yet 86% of clinically actionable deterioration events are preceded by observable warning signs that go unrecognised in the data stream due to alarm fatigue, information overload, and the cognitive limitations of human monitoring. Real-time intelligent monitoring systems that synthesise multiparameter data streams into actionable clinical alerts promise to reduce missed deterioration events and improve ICU outcomes. This study developed and evaluated five monitoring architectures -- threshold-based alarm systems (current standard), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), single-parameter trend analysis, multi-parameter statistical process control (SPC), and a proposed AI-integrated clinical surveillance platform (AICSP) combining streaming time-series anomaly detection, multi-organ failure risk prediction, and contextual alert suppression -- in a prospective observational study across 3 ICUs (n = 842 patients, 14,286 patient-days). AICSP detected 92.4% of clinical deterioration events (cardiac arrest, unplanned intubation, vasopressor escalation, emergency surgery) with a median lead time of 4.8 hours before clinical recognition, while reducing total alarm burden by 68.4% compared to threshold-based systems (from 187 +- 42 alarms/bed/day to 59 +- 18; p < 0.001). The positive predictive value of AICSP alerts was 42.6% (vs 6.8% for threshold alarms and 18.4% for MEWS; p < 0.001), meaning that fewer than 3 AICSP alerts were needed to identify each true deterioration event compared to 15 threshold alarms. Nursing response time to AICSP alerts was 3.2 +- 1.4 minutes versus 8.6 +- 4.2 minutes for threshold alarms (p < 0.001), reflecting increased clinician trust in the filtered, contextualised alert stream. These results establish AI-integrated clinical surveillance as a transformative approach to ICU monitoring that simultaneously improves detection sensitivity, reduces alarm fatigue, and accelerates clinical response

Downloads

Published

2026-08-14

How to Cite

Real-Time Monitoring Systems in ICU Settings. (2026). International Archives of Biomedicine, Life Sciences and Bioengineering, 2(3), 112-120. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19542516

Similar Articles

31-40 of 88

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.