Comments on this technology were invited from clinical experts working in the field and relevant patient organisations. The comments received are individual opinions and do not represent NICE's view.
Five experts were involved in the development of this briefing, 4 experts were familiar with the technology and had used it before.
Three experts said Lifelight First is a novel and innovative design and 2 said the technology is a significant change and advancement in care.
All experts felt the technology could improve clinical outcomes if it is proven to be accurate. Experts felt that the technology could improve the detection of abnormalities and increase more timely treatment, to improve patient experience. They acknowledged the technology would be particularly useful in situations when it would be beneficial to reduce physical contact, such as monitoring in premature babies, people with mental health conditions or infectious conditions, including COVID‑19.
Most of the experts believed the technology would be timesaving for healthcare professionals. They thought it has the potential to be cost saving if it is proven to be accurate, although an initial capital cost would be expected. Two experts believed the technology would reduce patient harm and the number of serious incidents. One expert believed the technology might reduce the length of hospital stay as a result of improved care because of better monitoring of clinical observations. One expert believed the technology could result in a shift in care from trained healthcare professionals completing manual clinical observations to non-medical staff using Lifelight First.
All experts agreed that training needed to use the device would be minimal, although a short learning curve would be expected. All experts noted the technology would be suitable for people with a range of conditions, but agreed that published evidence is needed to demonstrate the accuracy of the technology.