This consensus document provides a framework for the uniform implementation and standardization of remote CIED monitoring in the Netherlands.
Supports nationwide remote CIED monitoring adoption in the Netherlands; extends prior consensus with framework for methodology, responsibilities, and reimbursement.
Remote monitoring of cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIED: pacemaker, cardiac resynchronisation therapy device and implantable cardioverter defibrillator) has been developed for technical control and follow-up using transtelephonic data transmission. In addition, automatic or patient-triggered alerts are sent to the cardiologist or allied professional who can respond if necessary with various interventions. The advantage of remote monitoring appears obvious in impending CIED failures and suspected symptoms but is less likely in routine follow-up of CIED. For this follow-up the indications, quality of care, cost-effectiveneness and patient satisfaction have to be determined before remote CIED monitoring can be applied in daily practice. Nevertheless remote CIED monitoring is expanding rapidly in the Netherlands without professional agreements about methodology, responsibilities of all the parties involved and that of the device patient, and reimbursement. The purpose of this consensus document on remote CIED monitoring and follow-up is to lay the base for a nationwide, uniform implementation in the Netherlands. This report describes the technical communication, current indications, benefits and limitations of remote CIED monitoring and follow-up, the role of the patient and device manufacturer, and costs and reimbursement. The view of cardiology experts and of other disciplines in conjunction with literature was incorporated in a preliminary series of recommendations. In addition, an overview of the questions related to remote CIED monitoring that need to be answered is given. This consensus document can be used for future guidelines for the Dutch profession.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cock et al. (2012) conducted a review in Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED). Remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices vs. Routine in-hospital follow-up was evaluated. Remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices requires uniform methodology, clear responsibilities, and appropriate reimbursement for nationwide implementation in the Netherlands.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: