Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients have increased safety when connected to remote monitoring as ICD problems and issues are instantly discovered compared to patients without a monitor. While remote monitoring is intrusive in the domestic environment, little HCI research has investigated how people live and interact with such monitoring technologies. We conducted a study with 19 ICD patients and their spouses using diaries and interviews. Our findings illustrate that our participants were satisfied with the monitoring despite the fact that they had almost no knowledge of the data collected and they lacked feedback from the monitor on transmission and operation. Based on our findings, we describe a safety paradox for remote monitoring as participants experienced less safety while being safer, and identify privacy and surveillance concerns in the unequal monitoring of ICD patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Skov et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: