Information regarding remote patient monitoring and related patient safety
Case reference FOI2026/01166
Received 26 March 2026
Published 6 May 2026
Request
Response
|
Ref |
Question / information requested |
Notes / response |
|
1 |
Use of remote patient monitoring |
|
|
1.1 |
Do you use remote patient monitoring for inpatients, patients on a virtual ward or in the emergency department? |
We use a small proportion of remote monitoring for pts on our ward. |
|
1.2 |
Type of monitoring system used e.g. wearable vital signs monitors, telemetry, remote pulse oximetry |
Covid19 medicine delivery unit- pulse oximetry |
|
1.3 |
Does the remote patient monitoring solution provide automated spot check monitoring or continuous monitoring? |
No, we ensure patients are called for updates. |
|
1.4 |
The clinical areas or pathways where monitoring is used e.g. emergency department, wards, virtual wards, respiratory care, post-operative monitoring |
Virtual Ward |
|
1.5 |
The vendor or system name used for continuous monitoring |
Guangdong Biolight Meditech Co |
|
2 |
Patient safety incidents related to observations and monitoring (data period: 1 January – 31 December 2025) |
Not held |
|
2.1 |
Number of patient safety incidents reported through the Trust’s patient safety reporting system related to · Failure to detect deterioration · Missed vital signs observations · Failure to escalate abnormal observations |
Not held |
|
2.2 |
Number of patient safety incidents reported locally: |
· Unrecognised hypoxia – 11 incidents · Diagnosis of sepsis after 4 hours in the emergency department – 2 Incidents · Cardiac arrests on the wards – 59 Incidents · Falls occurring without observation – 511 Incidents · Incidents of patient awareness during surgery – 0 Incident |
|
|
|
- Unrecognised hypoxia- not held - Diagnosis of sepsis after 4 hours in the emergency department- above 18 hours (manual audit) - Cardiac arrests on the wards - Falls occurring without observation- not held / above 18 hours requires manual audit) - Incidents of patient awareness during surgery-not held / above 18 hours We have an average of 40 Ulysses per month relating to patient deterioration and approx. 80 2222 calls per month for adult patients. |
|
3 |
Deterioration and Early Warning Data (data period: 1 January – 31 December 2025) |
|
|
3.1 |
Number of rapid response/critical care outreach calls · The number triggered by abnormal vital signs or NEWS2 scores · The number where clinical review identified delayed escalation · The number of calls between the hours of 05:00 and 08:00 · The number of calls between 05:00 and 08:00 where patient was RIP |
Not available in an accessible format |
|
3.2 |
Unexpected The total number of unexpected ICU admissions from the wards |
Not held = Unexpected |
|
3.3 |
Cardiac arrests outside ICU or the emergency department · The number of cardiac arrests outside ICU or the emergency department · The number of these events where the patient had documented abnormal vital signs within the preceding 24 hours · The number where internal review identified failure to detect or escalate deterioration |
22 is the number recorded in Ulysses (our risk reporting system) |
|
3.4 |
The number of incidents coded as ‘failure to rescue’ or ‘failure to detect deterioration’ (or similarly aligned coding) in ward patients |
Not held in this format / above 18 hours |
|
4 |
Observation compliance (data period: January – December 2025) |
|
|
4.1 |
Are observations recorded manually or automatically pushed to the EPR? |
|
|
4.2 |
Audit data on compliance with NEWS2 observation frequency and NEWS2 escalation compliance: |
Target set for 70% average 65% for last month · Provide data showing the percentage of vital-sign observations completed within scheduled NEWS2 timeframe - We do not complete this on a scheduled time frame due to Virtual ward however this is completed at every visit. · Provide data showing the percentage of vital-sign observations completed outside scheduled NEWS2 timeframe (late) · Average delay where available -N/A |
|
4.3 |
Please provide any audit data or electronic observation system reports showing compliance with escalation requirements for high NEWS2 scores >5 or >7, including: · Number of patients with NEWS2 >5 or >7 · Number receiving escalation within the required timeframe · Number where escalation was delayed · Number with no documented escalation |
· Number receiving escalation within the required timeframe- this will be a very difficult number to quantify and we will only be aware via 2222 calls or Ulysses which will not capture all patients · Number where escalation was delayed- as per the comment above · Number with no documented escalation- as per the comment above. |
|
5 |
Virtual Wards/Remote monitoring at home (data period: January – December 2025) |
|
|
5.1 |
Does the Trust operate a virtual ward? |
Yes |
|
5.2 |
Number of patients monitored each year |
Average case load per year for Care- 1710 Home Hospice- 460 Hospital at home- 4025 COPAT-406 CMDU- 71 Total 6673 |
|
5.3 |
Conditions monitored e.g. respiratory disease, heart failure, post-operative recovery |
All conditions can be accepted by H@H if the patient prefers treatment at home. |
|
6 |
Please provide any internal evaluations, pilots or business cases regarding remote patient monitoring systems |
We have a current pilot starting in a few months with a company called Medoma. This is a remote monitoring scheduling platform. |
Documents
This is Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust's response to a freedom of information (FOI) or environmental information regulations (EIR) request.
You can browse our other responses or make a new FOI request.