Dataset Information

Performance of a remote interrogation system for the in-hospital evaluation of cardiac implantable electronic devices.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) often need device interrogation in an in-hospital environment. A diagnosis-only, remote interrogation device and process for CIED interrogation was developed to address this situation. Here, we describe our initial clinical experience with this system.

Methods

The LATITUDE Consult Communicator is a stand-alone interrogation-only device used to read the patient's implanted CIED. Once retrieved, the data are securely transmitted via an analog phone line to a central server. The clinician can request a review of the transmitted data at any time. Following FDA approval, we determined the usage and performance of the system.

Results

Communicators (n = 53) were installed in 42 hospital facilities. The most common location was in the emergency department (n = 32, 60 %). There were 509 discreet transmissions, which were categorized as follows: no arrhythmia episodes in the past 72 h and no out of range measurements (n = 174, 34 %); arrhythmia episodes in past 72 h but no out of range measurements (n = 170, 33 %); and further review recommended (n = 130, 26 %). (In 35 [7 %] instances, interrogation without analysis was requested.) The further review interrogations were then sub-divided into those of a non-urgent and urgent nature. Overall, only 53 (10 %) of the 509 transmissions were classified as urgent. Clinicians had access to full technical consultation in ≤15 min in 89 % of instances.

Conclusion

Our data demonstrate the feasibility of a new diagnosis-only, remote interrogation device and remote evaluation process for the interrogation of CIEDs in an in-hospital environment.

SUBMITTER: Mittal S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4923098 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRemote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has demonstrated substantial benefits. Treatment guidelines have therefore endorsed its use and is being increasingly adopted in the clinical setting, but the level of satisfaction they convey remains still unknown. We developed and validated a questionnaire to measure patient satisfaction with remote monitoring using Medtronic CareLink® Network and assessed its internal reliability and dimensional validity.MethodsAfter a thorough literature review, cognitive debriefing of 18 patients, and an expert panel discussion, a 30-item instrument was proposed and grouped into 5 dimensions (items): 1- Information on cardiac condition (3), 2- Device convenience (3), 3- Transmission process (6), 4- Satisfaction with medical monitoring (8), and 5- General opinions (10). Correlation with the visual analog scale (VAS), overall health related quality of life (HRQoL) measured by the EuroQoL-5D accompanied by the VAS as well as with the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) SF-36 were assessed. Psychometric properties, exploratory factor analysis and a second order confirmatory factor analysis (a hierarchical CFA with a general common factor explaining the relations between the first order common factors, See Figure 1) were estimated. Models were assessed based on item loading size, sign and statistical significance, and goodness-of-fit statistics.ResultsA total of 186 patients (77% male) with a mean age of 66.03 (SD?=?13.94) years were assessed. 48% had implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, 24% had pacemakers, and 29% had cardiac resynchronization therapy devices. An overall Cronbach's ??=?0.893 was achieved, with acceptable reliabilities for isolated dimensions. Correlations with corresponding VAS scales were meaningful and significant (p?<?0.01). The second order factor solution yielded good goodness-of-fit indexes (?2/df?=?1.44, CFI?=?0.96, TLI?=?0.95, RMSEA?=?0.05). Satisfaction with remote monitoring was not related to HRQoL (r?<?0.05), except for the correlation between the SF-36 mental component and the information on cardiac condition dimension (r?=?0.263, p?<?0.001).ConclusionsThe 30-item questionnaire showed good reliability and validity to assess satisfaction with remote monitoring in patients with CIEDs.

Project description:BackgroundRemote management is partially replacing routine follow-up in patients implanted with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Although it reduces clinical staff time compared with standard in-office follow-up, a new definition of roles and responsibilities may be needed to review remote transmissions in an effective, efficient, and timely manner. Whether remote triage may be outsourced to an external remote monitoring center (ERMC) is still unclear.ObjectiveThe aim of this health care quality improvement project was to evaluate the feasibility of outsourcing remote triage to an ERMC to improve patient care and health care resource utilization.MethodsPatients (N=153) with implanted CIEDs were followed up for 8 months. An ERMC composed of nurses and physicians reviewed remote transmissions daily following a specific remote monitoring (RM) protocol. A 6-month benchmarking phase where patients' transmissions were managed directly by hospital staff was evaluated as a term of comparison.ResultsA total of 654 transmissions were recorded in the RM system and managed by the ERMC team within 2 working days, showing a significant time reduction compared with standard RM management (100% vs 11%, respectively, within 2 days; P<.001). A total of 84.3% (551/654) of the transmissions did not include a prioritized event and did not require escalation to the hospital clinician. High priority was assigned to 2.3% (15/654) of transmissions, which were communicated to the hospital team by email within 1 working day. Nonurgent device status events occurred in 88 cases and were communicated to the hospital within 2 working days. Of these, 11% (10/88) were followed by a hospitalization.ConclusionsThe outsourcing of RM management to an ERMC safely provides efficacy and efficiency gains in patients' care compared with a standard in-hospital management. Moreover, the externalization of RM management could be a key tool for saving dedicated staff and facility time with possible positive economic impact.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01007474; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01007474.

Project description:BackgroundOutcomes for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices are better when follow-up incorporates remote monitoring technology in addition to in-clinic visits. For patients with implantable devices, we sought to determine the feasibility, safety and associated health care utilization of remote-only follow-up, along with its effects on patients' quality of life and costs.MethodsThis multicentre before-and-after pilot study involved patients with new or existing pacemakers or implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The "before" phase of the study spanned the period October 2015 to February 2017; the "after" phase spanned the period October 2016 to February 2018. The exposure was remote-only follow-up in combination with Remote View, a service that facilitates access to device data, allowing device settings to be viewed remotely to facilitate remote programming. Outcomes at 12 months were feasibility (adherence to remote monitoring), safety (rate of adverse events) and health care utilization (remote and in-clinic appointments). We also assessed quality of life, using 3 validated scales, and costs, taking into account both health care system and patient costs.ResultsA total of 176 patients were enrolled. Adherence (defined as at least 1 successful remote transmission during follow-up) was 87% over a mean follow-up of 11.7 (standard deviation 2.2) months. There was a reduction in in-clinic visits at specialized sites among patients with both implantable defibrillators (26 v. 5, p < 0.001, n = 48) and pacemakers (42 v. 10, p < 0.001, n = 51). There was no significant change in visits to community sites for patients with defibrillators (13 v. 17, p = 0.3, n = 48). The composite rate of death, stroke, cardiovascular hospitalization and device-related hospitalization was 7% (n = 164). No adverse events were linked to the intervention. There was no change in quality-of-life scales between baseline and 12 months. Health care costs were reduced by 31% for patients with defibrillators and by 44% for those with pacemakers.InterpretationThis pilot study showed the feasibility of remote-only follow-up, with no increase in adverse clinical outcomes and no effect on quality of life, but with reductions in costs and health care utilization. These results support progression to a larger-scale study of whether superior effectiveness and reduced cost can be achieved, with preservation of safety, through use of remote-only follow-up.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02585817.