Wearable monitoring reduced prolonged hospital stay from 24% to 7% in lung cancer surgery cohorts

Photo by Trnava University / Unsplash

Frontiers in Medicine Published June 4, 2026 Medically reviewed June 4, 2026 Study authors: Xiang Lin, Jingwen Zhang, Beinuo Wang, Zhenghao Dong, Yu Tong, Jian Zhou, Hu Liao DOI ↗ By Dr. Julia Lee, PhD · Oncology, Genomics & Drug Development

Key Takeaway

Note that wearable monitoring reduced prolonged hospital stay from 24% to 7% but evidence is sparse.

This narrative synthesis evaluates eight reports representing seven independent cohorts of adults undergoing lung cancer surgery or clinically relevant pulmonary resection. The scope covers preoperative, in-hospital, or post-discharge phases involving wearable-based activity, physiologic monitoring, or rehabilitation support. The review does not report a specific comparator or primary outcome but analyzes secondary outcomes including prolonged hospital stay, postoperative length of stay, chest tube duration, recovery outcomes, feasibility, data transmission, and agreement with electronic health record measurements.

Key results indicate that prolonged hospital stay greater than five days was reduced from 24% to 7% with a p-value of 0.021. Postoperative length of stay and chest tube duration were shorter in the intervention group, though specific effect sizes were not reported. Associations between perioperative step counts and recovery outcomes were described as weak but significant with a positive direction.

The authors highlight limitations including clinical and methodological heterogeneity, sparse evidence, heterogeneous evidence, and often indirect evidence. Safety data, adverse events, serious adverse events, discontinuations, and tolerability were not reported. The review concludes that findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating rather than sufficient to support routine clinical implementation due to these constraints.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis

EvidenceLevel 1

PublishedJun 2026

View Original Abstract ↓

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways in thoracic oncology emphasize early mobilization and objective discharge readiness, but perioperative functional recovery is often assessed intermittently. Wearable devices may provide continuous, objective recovery metrics. We conducted a PRISMA 2020-based systematic review registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261325339). PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched for English-language studies published between February 2, 1996 and February 2, 2026. Eligible reports included adults undergoing lung cancer surgery or clinically relevant pulmonary resection and evaluated wearable-based activity, physiologic monitoring, or rehabilitation support across the preoperative, in-hospital, or post-discharge phases. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2, ROBINS-I, or design-appropriate feasibility and measurement appraisal. Certainty of evidence was qualitatively informed by GRADE principles, and findings were synthesized narratively because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Eight reports representing seven independent cohorts were included: two randomized trials, one nonrandomized trial with historical controls, two prospective observational studies, two companion single-arm preoperative feasibility/effectiveness reports, and one development/usability agreement study. In the Move For Surgery RCT, wearable-enhanced preconditioning reduced prolonged hospital stay >5 days from 24% to 7% (12/50 vs 3/45; p=0.021). A digital chest drainage RCT reported shorter postoperative length of stay and chest tube duration in the intervention group, although the cohort was not restricted to lung cancer. Observational studies showed weak but significant associations between perioperative step counts and recovery outcomes. Feasibility studies supported device use and data transmission, while a smartwatch-ePRO study showed close agreement with electronic health record measurements. Wearable-based perioperative monitoring appears feasible and may provide objective recovery signals in lung cancer surgery. However, current evidence remains sparse, heterogeneous, and often indirect. Findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating rather than sufficient to support routine clinical implementation. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261325339, identifier CRD420261325339.