Key result
Remote device monitoring appears safe, effective, and cost-saving compared to conventional in-clinic follow-up.
Why the study?
Increasing patient volumes and resource demands challenge conventional in-clinic follow-up for cardiac implantable devices, prompting evaluation of remote monitoring as an alternative.
Does remote device monitoring improve effectiveness and reduce outpatient visits compared to conventional in-clinic follow-up in patients with cardiac implantable devices?
Does remote device monitoring improve effectiveness and reduce outpatient visits compared to conventional in-clinic follow-up in patients with cardiac implantable devices?
Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable devices offers a safe, effective, and convenient alternative to routine in-clinic visits, potentially reducing healthcare resource burden.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Hypothesis-generating for easing CIED follow-up burden; prospective RCTs needed before practice change.
Cardiac monitoring through implantable devices is increasing in volume of patients, which implies increases in human capacity to monitor each patient in person. Continuous monitoring of the device permits remote awareness of the condition of both patient and implantable device. Such a telemedicine link can optimize healthcare delivery and improve effectiveness through a reduction in outpatient visits. The conventional approach to cardiac implantable device follow-up involves patients attending regularly scheduled in-clinic visits to verify the functionality and safety of the implanted devices. Due to increasing patient volumes, as well as the time, capital, and human resources required, such routine device follow-up contributes a significant resource burden to already overstrained clinics and electrophysiology departments, as well as to patients and caregivers in terms of travel and time. Continuous device status monitoring via remote means (i.e., remote device monitoring) allows clinics the ability to immediately be aware of changes in device functionality to proactively respond to actionable events, and may represent a safe, effective, and cost-saving alternative to conventional in-clinic follow-up programs. The currently available systems to remotely transmit device data combine leading medical and information technology using Web-based networks that promptly provide physicians with data comparable to in-clinic follow-up visits and offer patients a high level of convenience.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stoepel et al. (2009) conducted a review in Cardiac implantable device follow-up. Remote device monitoring vs. Conventional in-clinic follow-up was evaluated. Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable devices may represent a safe, effective, and cost-saving alternative to conventional in-clinic follow-up.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: