SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Fenerbahçe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 5 Sayı: 3

Wearable Technologies in Postoperative Nursing Care: Innovative Approaches in the Digital Health Age

Ameliyat Sonrası Hemşirelik Bakımında Giyilebilir Teknolojiler: Dijital Sağlık Çağında Yenilikçi Yaklaşımlar

Niran Çoban(YALOVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1926-5362
Pages
398–413
Publication Date
2025-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In order to fully utilise the opportunities offered by wearable technologies in postoperative nursing care, more scientific studies should be conducted in the field of surgical nursing and the integration of these technologies into practice should be supported.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Wearable technologies have gained an increasing place in healthcare services and have an important potential in the field of surgical nursing.
📊
Key Findings & Data:These technologies offer innovative solutions to optimise postoperative care processes, increase patient safety and accelerate the healing process.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In order to fully utilise the opportunities offered by wearable technologies in postoperative nursing care, more scientific studies should be conducted in the field of surgical nursing and the integration of these technologies into practice should be supported.
🔬Design:Derleme
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dijital sağlık · ameliyat sonrası · hemşirelik bakımı

Abstract

Wearable technologies have gained an increasing place in healthcare services and have an important potential in the field of surgical nursing. These technologies offer innovative solutions to optimise postoperative care processes, increase patient safety and accelerate the healing process. These devices, which monitor many physiological parameters such as heart rate, respiratory functions, activity level and wound healing in real time, help nurses to perform patient management more effectively. While traditional patient monitoring methods usually require the direct intervention of healthcare professionals, wearable health technologies allow patients to be monitored in real time and individualised care approaches can be developed. These systems, which instantly monitor biometric data such as heart rate, oxygen saturation, body temperature and mobility, both support the decision-making processes of healthcare professionals and increase patient comfort. Integration of these technologies into surgical nursing practices has the potential to increase the quality of patient care while reducing costs on healthcare systems. However, studies in this field are limited and more research is needed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of wearable devices, patient satisfaction and nurses' attitudes towards the use of these technologies. In order to fully utilise the opportunities offered by wearable technologies in postoperative nursing care, more scientific studies should be conducted in the field of surgical nursing and the integration of these technologies into practice should be supported.

Özet

Giyilebilir teknolojiler, sağlık hizmetlerinde giderek daha fazla yer edinmekte ve cerrahi hemşirelik alanında önemli bir potansiyele sahiptir. Bu teknolojiler, ameliyat sonrası bakım süreçlerini optimize etmek, hasta güvenliğini artırmak ve iyileşme sürecini hızlandırmak için yenilikçi çözümler sunmaktadır. Kalp atış hızı, solunum fonksiyonları, aktivite seviyesi ve yara iyileşmesi gibi birçok fizyolojik parametreyi gerçek zamanlı olarak izleyen bu cihazlar, hemşirelerin hasta yönetimini daha etkili bir şekilde gerçekleştirmelerine yardımcı olmaktadır. Geleneksel hasta izleme yöntemleri genellikle sağlık profesyonellerinin doğrudan müdahalesini gerektirirken, giyilebilir sağlık teknolojileri hastaların gerçek zamanlı olarak izlenmesini ve kişiselleştirilmiş bakım yaklaşımlarının geliştirilmesini sağlar. Kalp atış hızı, oksijen satürasyonu, vücut ısısı ve hareketlilik gibi biyometrik verileri anında izleyen bu sistemler, hem sağlık profesyonellerinin karar verme süreçlerini destekler hem de hasta konforunu artırır. Bu teknolojilerin cerrahi hemşirelik uygulamalarına entegrasyonu, hasta bakımının kalitesini artırırken sağlık sistemlerinin maliyetlerini düşürme potansiyeline sahiptir. Ancak, bu alandaki çalışmalar sınırlıdır ve giyilebilir cihazların klinik etkinliğini, hasta memnuniyetini ve hemşirelerin bu teknolojilerin kullanımına yönelik tutumlarını değerlendirmek için daha fazla araştırma yapılması gerekmektedir. Ameliyat sonrası hemşirelik bakımında giyilebilir teknolojilerin sunduğu fırsatlardan tam olarak yararlanmak için, cerrahi hemşirelik alanında daha fazla bilimsel çalışma yapılmalı ve bu teknolojilerin uygulamaya entegrasyonu desteklenmelidir

🔖

Cite This Article

Çoban, N. (2025). Wearable Technologies in Postoperative Nursing Care: Innovative Approaches in the Digital Health Age. Fenerbahçe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 3, 398–413. https://doi.org/10.56061/fbujohs.1794299

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (60)

  1. Abbott, T. E. F., Fowler, A. J., Dobbs, T. D., Harrison, E. M., Gillies, M. A., & Pearse, R. M. (2017). Frequency of surgical treatment and related hospital procedures in the UK: a national ecological study using hospital episode statistics. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 119(2), 249–257. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aex137
  2. Adam Noah, J., Spierer, D. K., Gu, J., & Bronner, S. (2013). Comparison of steps and energy expenditure assessment in adults of Fitbit Tracker and Ultra to the Actical and indirect calorimetry. Journal of Medical Engineering & Technology, 37(7), 456–462. https://doi.org/10.3109/03091902.2013.831135
  3. Agarwal, D. K., Viers, B. R., Rivera, M. E., Nienow, D. A., Frank, I., Tollefson, M. K., & Gettman, M. T. (2018). Physical activity monitors can be successfully implemented to assess perioperative activity in urologic surgery. MHealth, 4, 43–43. https://doi.org/10.21037/mhealth.2018.09.05
  4. Alshammari, J. N., Aljuhanei, S. D., Alanazi, S. T., Alruwaili, M. O. S., Alenazi, A. M. T., & Alfuhigi, R. A. T. (2024). The Importance of The Nursing Role in Postoperatıve Patient Care. Gland Surgery, 9(2), 408–415.
  5. Amin, T., Mobbs, R. J., Mostafa, N., Sy, L. W., & Choy, W. J. (2021). Wearable devices for patient monitoring in the early postoperative period: a literature review. MHealth, 7, 50. https://doi.org/10.21037/mhealth-20-131
  6. Appelboom, G., Yang, A. H., Christophe, B. R., Bruce, E. M., Slomian, J., Bruyère, O., Bruce, S. S., Zacharia, B. E., Reginster, J.-Y., & Sander Connolly, E. (2014). The promise of wearable activity sensors to define patient recovery. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 21(7), 1089–1093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2013.12.003
  7. Atallah, L., Lo, B., Ali, R., King, R., & Guang-Zhong Yang. (2009). Real-Time Activity Classification Using Ambient and Wearable Sensors. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, 13(6), 1031–1039. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITB.2009.2028575
  8. Aziz, O., Atallah, L., Lo, B., ElHelw, M., Wang, L., Yang, G. Z., & Darzi, A. (2007a). A Pervasive Body Sensor Network for Measuring Postoperative Recovery at Home. Surgical Innovation, 14(2), 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350607302326
  9. Aziz, O., Atallah, L., Lo, B., ElHelw, M., Wang, L., Yang, G. Z., & Darzi, A. (2007b). A Pervasive Body Sensor Network for Measuring Postoperative Recovery at Home. Surgical Innovation, 14(2), 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350607302326
  10. Aziz, O., Atallah, L., Lo, B., Gray, E., Athanasiou, T., Darzi, A., & Yang, G.-Z. (2011). Ear-worn body sensor network device: an objective tool for functional postoperative home recovery monitoring. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 18(2), 156–159. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2010.005173
  11. Baldwin, C., van Kessel, G., Phillips, A., & Johnston, K. (2017). Accelerometry Shows Inpatients With Acute Medical or Surgical Conditions Spend Little Time Upright and Are Highly Sedentary: Systematic Review. Physical Therapy, 97(11), 1044–1065. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzx076
  12. Barber, E. L., Garg, R., Strohl, A., Roque, D., & Tanner, E. (2022). Feasibility and Prediction of Adverse Events in a Postoperative Monitoring Program of Patient-Reported Outcomes and a Wearable Device Among Gynecologic Oncology Patients. JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics, 6. https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI.21.00167
  13. Berthelot, M., Henry, F. P., Hunter, J., Leff, D., Wood, S., Jallali, N., Dex, E., Lysakova, L., Lo, B., & Yang, G.-Z. (2019). Pervasive wearable device for free tissue transfer monitoring based on advanced data analysis: clinical study report. Journal of Biomedical Optics, 24(06), 1. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JBO.24.6.067001
  14. Bölükbaş, N., & Birlikbaş, S. (2019). ERAS Rehberleri Cerrahi Sonrası Hızlandırılmış İyileşme Protokolleri. Ordu Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Çalışmaları Dergisi, 2(3), 194–205.
  15. Brown, D., & Xhaja, A. (2018). Nursing Perspectives on Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. Surgical Clinics of North America, 98(6), 1211–1221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2018.07.008
  16. Bunn, J., Navalta, J. W., Fountaine, C. J., & Reece, J. (2018). Current State of Commercial Wearable Technology in Physical Activity Monitoring 2015-2017. International Journal of Exercise Science, 11(7), 503–515. https://doi.org/10.70252/NJQX2719
  17. Carmichael, H., Overbey, D. M., Hosokawa, P., Goode, C. M., Jones, T. S., Barnett Jr., C. C., Jones, E. L., & Robinson, T. N. (2019). Wearable Technology—A Pilot Study to Define “Normal” Postoperative Recovery Trajectories. Journal of Surgical Research, 244, 368–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.06.057
  18. Cook, D. J., Thompson, J. E., Prinsen, S. K., Dearani, J. A., & Deschamps, C. (2013). Functional Recovery in the Elderly After Major Surgery: Assessment of Mobility Recovery Using Wireless Technology. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 96(3), 1057–1061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.05.092
  19. Feehan, L. M., Geldman, J., Sayre, E. C., Park, C., Ezzat, A. M., Yoo, J. Y., Hamilton, C. B., & Li, L. C. (2018). Accuracy of Fitbit Devices: Systematic Review and Narrative Syntheses of Quantitative Data. JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 6(8), e10527. https://doi.org/10.2196/10527
  20. García-del-Valle, S., Arnal-Velasco, D., Molina-Mendoza, R., & Gómez-Arnau, J. I. (2021). Update on early warning scores. Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology, 35(1), 105–113. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpa.2020.12.013
  21. Ghomrawi, H. M., Baumann, L. M., Kwon, S., Hebal, F., Hsiung, G., Williams, K., Reimann, M., Stake, C., Johnson, E. K., & Abdullah, F. (2018). Using accelerometers to characterize recovery after surgery in children. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 53(8), 1600–1605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2017.09.016
  22. Glaysher, M. A., & Cresswell, A. Ben. (2017). Management of common surgical complications. Surgery - Oxford International Edition, 35(4), 190–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpsur.2017.01.009
  23. Gorzelitz, J., Costanzo, E. S., Spencer, R. J., Rumble, M., Rose, S. L., & Cadmus-Bertram, L. (2019). Longitudinal assessment of post-surgical physical activity in endometrial and ovarian cancer patients. PLOS ONE, 14(10), e0223791. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223791
  24. Huhn, S., Axt, M., Gunga, H.-C., Maggioni, M. A., Munga, S., Obor, D., Sié, A., Boudo, V., Bunker, A., Sauerborn, R., Bärnighausen, T., & Barteit, S. (2022). The Impact of Wearable Technologies in Health Research: Scoping Review. JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 10(1), e34384. https://doi.org/10.2196/34384
  25. Ito, T., Maekawa, H., Sakurada, M., Orita, H., Kushida, T., Senuma, K., & Sato, K. (2016). Risk factors for postoperative complications in patients on maintenance hemodialysis who undergo abdominal surgery. Asian Journal of Surgery, 39(4), 211–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asjsur.2015.03.013
  26. Jhanji, S., Thomas, B., Ely, A., Watson, D., Hinds, C. J., & Pearse, R. M. (2008). Mortality and utilisation of critical care resources amongst high‐risk surgical patients in a large NHS trust*. Anaesthesia, 63(7), 695–700. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05560.x
  27. Johanson, N. A., Lachiewicz, P. F., Lieberman, J. R., Lotke, P. A., Parvizi, J., Pellegrini, V., Stringer, T. A., Tornetta, P., Haralson, R. H., & Watters, W. C. (2009). Prevention of Symptomatic Pulmonary Embolism in Patients Undergoing Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 17(3), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.5435/00124635-200903000-00007
  28. Keppler, A. M., Holzschuh, J., Pfeufer, D., Neuerburg, C., Kammerlander, C., Böcker, W., & Fürmetz, J. (2020). Postoperative physical activity in orthogeriatric patients – new insights with continuous monitoring. Injury, 51(3), 628–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2020.01.041
  29. Keppler, A. M., Nuritidinow, T., Mueller, A., Hoefling, H., Schieker, M., Clay, I., Böcker, W., & Fürmetz, J. (2019). Validity of accelerometry in step detection and gait speed measurement in orthogeriatric patients. PLOS ONE, 14(8), e0221732. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221732
  30. Kim, D. H., Nam, K. H., Choi, B. K., Han, I. H., Jeon, T. J., & Park, S. Y. (2019). The Usefulness of a Wearable Device in Daily Physical Activity Monitoring for the Hospitalized Patients Undergoing Lumbar Surgery. Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, 62(5), 561–566. https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2018.0131
  31. Knight, S. R., Ng, N., Tsanas, A., Mclean, K., Pagliari, C., & Harrison, E. M. (2021). Mobile devices and wearable technology for measuring patient outcomes after surgery: a systematic review. Npj Digital Medicine, 4(1), 157. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00525-1
  32. Krell, R. W., Girotti, M. E., & Dimick, J. B. (2014). Extended Length of Stay After Surgery. JAMA Surgery, 149(8), 815. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2014.629
  33. Lam, C.-F., Hsieh, S.-Y., Wang, J.-H., Pan, H.-S., Liu, X.-Z., Ho, Y.-C., & Chen, T.-Y. (2016). Incidence and characteristic analysis of in-hospital falls after anesthesia. Perioperative Medicine, 5(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13741-016-0038-z
  34. Lee, H., Min, H., Oh, S., & Shim, K. (2018). Mobile Technology in Undergraduate Nursing Education: A Systematic Review. Healthcare Informatics Research, 24(2), 97. https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2018.24.2.97
  35. Low, C. A., Bovbjerg, D. H., Ahrendt, S., Choudry, M. H., Holtzman, M., Jones, H. L., Pingpank, J. F., Ramalingam, L., Zeh, H. J., Zureikat, A. H., & Bartlett, D. L. (2018). Fitbit step counts during inpatient recovery from cancer surgery as a predictor of readmission. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 52(1), 88–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kax022
  36. Marfil-Garza, B. A., Belaunzarán-Zamudio, P. F., Gulias-Herrero, A., Zuñiga, A. C., Caro-Vega, Y., Kershenobich-Stalnikowitz, D., & Sifuentes-Osornio, J. (2018). Risk factors associated with prolonged hospital length-of-stay: 18-year retrospective study of hospitalizations in a tertiary healthcare center in Mexico. PLOS ONE, 13(11), e0207203. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207203
  37. Massouh, F., Martin, R., Chan, B., Ma, J., Patel, V., Geary, M. P., Laffey, J. G., Wijeysundera, D. N., & Abdallah, F. W. (2019). Is Activity Tracker–Measured Ambulation an Accurate and Reliable Determinant of Postoperative Quality of Recovery? A Prospective Cohort Validation Study. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 129(4), 1144–1152. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000003913
  38. Mercer, K., Li, M., Giangregorio, L., Burns, C., & Grindrod, K. (2016). Behavior Change Techniques Present in Wearable Activity Trackers: A Critical Analysis. JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 4(2), e40. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.4461
  39. Mishra, A., Nieto, A., & Kitsiou, S. (2017). Systematic Review of mHealth Interventions Involving Fitbit Activity Tracking Devices. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI), 455–455. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICHI.2017.42
  40. Montgomery-Downs, H. E., Insana, S. P., & Bond, J. A. (2012). Movement toward a novel activity monitoring device. Sleep and Breathing, 16(3), 913–917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11325-011-0585-y
  41. Moor, D., Aggarwal, G., & Quiney, N. (2017). Systemic response to surgery. Surgery (Oxford), 35(4), 220–223. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpsur.2017.01.013
  42. Noro, H., Yoshikawa, M., Nomura, M., Yumiba, T., Taniguchi, E., Ohashi, S., Souda, S., Matsuda, H., Inoue, Y., & Kimura, T. (2003). Is laparoscopic colorectal surgery less invasive than classical open surgery? Quantitation of physical activity using an accelerometer to assess postoperative convalescence. Surgical Endoscopy, 17(8), 1269–1273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8876-9
  43. Routen, A., Upton, D., Edwards, M., & Peters, D. (2012). Intra- and Inter-Instrument Reliability of the Actiwatch 4 Accelerometer in a Mechanical Laboratory Setting. Journal of Human Kinetics, 31(2012), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10078-012-0002-z
  44. Scheer, J. K., Bakhsheshian, J., Keefe, M. K., Lafage, V., Bess, S., Protopsaltis, T. S., Burton, D. C., Hart, R. A., Shaffrey, C. I., Schwab, F., Smith, J. S., Smith, Z. A., Koski, T. R., & Ames, C. P. (2017). Initial Experience With Real-Time Continuous Physical Activity Monitoring in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery. Clinical Spine Surgery: A Spine Publication, 30(10), E1434–E1443. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000521
  45. Shibata, C., Ogawa, H., Nakano, T., Koyama, K., Yamamoto, K., Nagao, M., Takeyama, D., Takami, K., Yasumoto, A., Sase, T., Kimura, S., Sawada, K., & Katayose, Y. (2019). Influence of age on postoperative complications especially pneumonia after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. BMC Surgery, 19(1), 106. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0573-x
  46. Stienen, M. N., Ho, A. L., Staartjes, V. E., Maldaner, N., Veeravagu, A., Desai, A., Gautschi, O. P., Bellut, D., Regli, L., Ratliff, J. K., & Park, J. (2019). Objective measures of functional impairment for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine: a systematic review of the literature. The Spine Journal, 19(7), 1276–1293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2019.02.014
  47. Stienen, M. N., Rezaii, P. G., Ho, A. L., Veeravagu, A., Zygourakis, C. C., Tomkins-Lane, C., Park, J., Ratliff, J. K., & Desai, A. M. (2020). Objective activity tracking in spine surgery: a prospective feasibility study with a low-cost consumer grade wearable accelerometer. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 4939. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61893-4
  48. Stone, K. L., & Ancoli-Israel, S. (2017). Actigraphy. In Principles and Practice of Sleep Medicine (pp. 1671-1678.e4). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-24288-2.00171-9
  49. Tevis, S. E., Kohlnhofer, B. M., Weber, S. M., & Kennedy, G. D. (2014). Postdischarge complications are an important predictor of postoperative readmissions. The American Journal of Surgery, 208(4), 505–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.05.013
  50. Thompson, J. S. (2003). Temporal Patterns of Postoperative Complications. Archives of Surgery, 138(6), 596. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.138.6.596
  51. Toogood, P. A., Abdel, M. P., Spear, J. A., Cook, S. M., Cook, D. J., & Taunton, M. J. (2016). The monitoring of activity at home after total hip arthroplasty. The Bone & Joint Journal, 98-B(11), 1450–1454. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.98B11.BJJ-2016-0194.R1
  52. Tusman, G., Böhm, S. H., Warner, D. O., & Sprung, J. (2012). Atelectasis and perioperative pulmonary complications in high-risk patients. Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology, 25(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0b013e32834dd1eb
  53. Van Rossum, M. C., Bekhuis, R. E. M., Wang, Y., Hegeman, J. H., Folbert, E. C., Vollenbroek-Hutten, M. M. R., Kalkman, C. J., Kouwenhoven, E. A., & Hermens, H. J. (2023). Early Warning Scores to Support Continuous Wireless Vital Sign Monitoring for Complication Prediction in Patients on Surgical Wards: Retrospective Observational Study. JMIR Perioperative Medicine, 6, e44483. https://doi.org/10.2196/44483
  54. Wells, C. I., Xu, W., Penfold, J. A., Keane, C., Gharibans, A. A., Bissett, I. P., & O’Grady, G. (2022). Wearable devices to monitor recovery after abdominal surgery: scoping review. BJS Open, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrac031
  55. Williams, T. A., Ho, K. M., Dobb, G. J., Finn, J. C., Knuiman, M., & Webb, S. A. R. (2010). Effect of length of stay in intensive care unit on hospital and long-term mortality of critically ill adult patients. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 104(4), 459–464. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeq025
  56. Wilson, D. (2017). An Overview of the Application of Wearable Technology to Nursing Practice. Nursing Forum, 52(2), 124–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12177
  57. Wu, J.-M., Ho, T.-W., Chang, Y.-T., Hsu, C., Tsai, C. J., Lai, F., & Lin, M.-T. (2019). Wearable-Based Mobile Health App in Gastric Cancer Patients for Postoperative Physical Activity Monitoring: Focus Group Study. JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 7(4), e11989. https://doi.org/10.2196/11989
  58. Xie, J., Wen, D., Liang, L., Jia, Y., Gao, L., & Lei, J. (2018). Evaluating the Validity of Current Mainstream Wearable Devices in Fitness Tracking Under Various Physical Activities: Comparative Study. JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 6(4), e94. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.9754
  59. Alshammari, J. N., Aljuhanei, S. D., Alanazi, S. T., Alruwaili, M. O. S., Alenazi, A. M. T., & Alfuhigi, R. A. T. (2024). The Importance of The Nursing Role in Postoperatıve Patient Care. Gland Surgery, 9(2), 408–415.
  60. Carmichael, H., Overbey, D. M., Hosokawa, P., Goode, C. M., Jones, T. S., Barnett Jr., C. C., Jones, E. L., & Robinson, T. N. (2019). Wearable Technology—A Pilot Study to Define “Normal” Postoperative Recovery Trajectories. Journal of Surgical Research, 244, 368–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.06.057