Wearable sensors enable remote, continuous patient monitoring at home, offering a promising approach for early detection of postoperative complications. However, analyzing continuous long-term physiological data remains challenging, particularly in the absence of precisely labeled deterioration events. Unsupervised change point detection methods can address this issue by identifying physiological deviations without requiring predefined event labels. This study investigates the feasibility of using a Long-Short-Term Memory (LSTM) autoencoder for detecting postoperative complications from continuous heart rate and respiration rate data using a wearable patch sensor while monitoring patients in their homes. The autoencoder was applied to identify physiological deviations that may indicate potential complications after major abdominal oncological surgeries in ten patients. The model was trained on data from seven patients to recognize deviations from normal physiological patterns and evaluated on three patients. The proposed model detected change points preceding the clinically documented complication time in two test patients, identifying these deteriorations an average of 3.25 hours earlier than the standard Remote Early Warning Score (REWS) alarm system. These findings suggest that LSTM autoencoder-based change point detection could be a valuable tool for identifying postoperative complications early in remote patient monitoring settings, to support timely intervention and potentially improving patient outcomes.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the differences in pressure sensitivity for areas of the human body in contact with the seat pan and backrest of a vehicle seat. These could provide a theoretical base for adapting the softness of the foam or the flexibility components used in seat design. Methods Sensitivity was recorded at 32 points touching the seat pan and backrest by pushing a cylinder with a diameter of 20 mm into the seat until the participant reported that they were no longer comfortable. The force at which discomfort was reported was recorded using an advanced force gauge. Results and conclusions The area of the body having contact with the front of the seat pan was more sensitive than the rest of those parts touching the seat pan. The area of the seat touching the shoulders was significantly more sensitive than the area in between the shoulders and lower down the back. Translating these findings directly into seat design should be done with care. Tests are still needed to confirm the assumed relationship between sensitivity and foam softness. Further information is also needed regarding the complete use of a seat, including analysis of vibrations while driving and comfort during ingress and egress.