Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Limited evidence from this rapid evaluation found that using pulse oximeters in care homes during COVID-19 pandemic was generally considered by managers and staff to be straightforward and be beneficial to residents.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Manbinder Sidhu 1, Ian Litchfield 2, Robin Miller 3, Naomi J Fulop 4, Barbara Janta 5, Jamie-Rae Tanner 1, Giulia Maistrello 5, Jenny Bousfield 5, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros 6, Jon Sussex 5,*

1 Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
2 Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
3 Department of Social Work and Social Care, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
4 Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
5 RAND Europe, Cambridge, UK
6 Department of Targeted Intervention, University College London, London, UK
* Corresponding author Email: jsussex@randeurope.org

Declared competing interests of authors: Naomi J Fulop is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) senior investigator and was a member of the following: NIHR Health and Social Care Delivery Research (HSDR) Programme Funding Committee (2013–18) and HSDR Evidence Synthesis Sub Board (2016). In addition, Naomi J Fulop is a trustee of Health Services Research UK (London, UK) and is the University College London-nominated non-executive director for Whittington Health NHS Trust (London, UK) (2018–22).

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document