Key result
Remote monitoring of pacemakers yielded similar health-related quality of life compared to hospital monitoring (EQ-5D 0.91 vs 0.81; P=0.154) and reduced in-hospital visits (3 vs 4; P<0.001).
Why the study?
Does remote monitoring of pacemakers improve health-related quality of life and functional capacity in older adults compared to conventional hospital monitoring?
Does remote monitoring of pacemakers improve health-related quality of life and functional capacity in older adults compared to conventional hospital monitoring?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.91% vs 0.81%
p-value: p=0.154
Remote monitoring of pacemakers in older adults provides equivalent quality of life and functional capacity to hospital monitoring while significantly reducing the number of in-hospital visits.
May reduce visits without compromising quality of life in older adults; leaves open randomized confirmation before practice change.
AIMS: The purpose of the present study was to assess the effectiveness of the remote monitoring (RM) of older adults with pacemakers on health-related quality of life, functional capacity, feasibility, reliability and safety. METHODS: The PONIENTE study is a controlled, non-randomized, non-blinded clinical trial, with data collection carried out during the pre-implant stage and after 12 months. Between October of 2012 and November of 2013, 82 patients were assigned to either a remote monitoring group (n = 30) or a conventional hospital monitoring (HM) group (n = 52). The EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) and the Duke Activity Status Index were used to measure health-related quality of life and functional capacity, respectively. Baseline characteristics and number of hospital visits were also analyzed. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the two study groups were similar for both the EQ-5D (RM 0.74, HM 0.67; P = 0.404) and the Duke Activity Status Index (RM 21.42, HM 19.95; P = 0.272). At the 12-month follow up, the EQ-5D utility score was improved for both groups (RM 0.91, HM 0.81; P = 0.154), unlike the EQ-5D Visual Analog Scale (P = 0.043). The Duke Activity Status Index score was similar to the baseline score. The number of in-hospital visits was 27% lower (3 vs 4; P < 0.001) in the remote group as compared with the hospital group. CONCLUSIONS: The PONIENTE trial suggests that the remote monitoring of pacemakers in older adults is an equivalent option to hospital monitoring, in terms of health-related quality of life and functional capacity. Furthermore, it allows for the early detection of clinical and pacemaker-related adverse events, and significantly reduces the number of in-hospital visits. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2016; 16: 1188-1195.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
López-Villegas et al. (2015) studied Pacemakers (n=82). Remote monitoring vs. Conventional hospital monitoring was evaluated on EQ-5D utility score at 12 months (p=0.154). Remote monitoring of pacemakers yielded similar health-related quality of life compared to hospital monitoring (EQ-5D 0.91 vs 0.81; P=0.154) and reduced in-hospital visits (3 vs 4; P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: