These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effect of home monitoring on a high-risk population.
    Author: Freed GE, Meny R, Glomb WB, Hageman JR.
    Journal: J Perinatol; 2002 Mar; 22(2):165-7. PubMed ID: 11896525.
    Abstract:
    A large cohort of infants (8,998) at high risk for sudden and unexpected death was followed with home cardiorespiratory monitoring over a five-year period. These infants included premature infants (23-36 weeks post-conceptual age), SIDS siblings, and infants who experienced an Apparent Life-Threatening Event. The overall SIDS rate in this high-risk population was 0.55/1,000, a rate significantly less than the 0.85 deaths/1,000 reported in the "general population" of Georgia over this same time period. In addition, we report our experience with using home monitors as a diagnostic tool, as well as how monitors can actually be cost-effective. Editorial opinions, and lay press summaries of the CHIME study (JAMA, May 2, 2001) imply that home cardiorespirtory monitors are of little value. Despite the fact that the study never made this claim, many clinicians are now referring to this study as evidence that home monitoring is ineffective and not needed. This article disputes those misconceptions about home cardiorespiratory monitors based on our experience with a large high-risk population of infants.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]