Key result
Dual-platform remote monitoring linked to ~19% fewer cardiac hospitalizations in heart failure.
Why the study?
Uncertainty remains regarding the development of single-centre RPM programs and no studies examine the effectiveness of dual platform RPM programs for heart failure.
Does a dual platform remote patient monitoring program reduce hospitalizations and ED visits in patients with heart failure?
Cohort (n=141)
No
Does a dual platform remote patient monitoring program reduce hospitalizations and ED visits in patients with heart failure?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Implementation of a dual platform remote patient monitoring program significantly reduced cardiac hospitalizations, length of stay, and ED visits in heart failure patients.
AIMS: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) in the management of heart failure (HF), including telemonitoring, thoracic impedance, implantable pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) monitors, and cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-based sensors, has had varying outcomes in single platform studies. Uncertainty remains regarding the development of single-centre RPM programs; additionally, no studies examine the effectiveness of dual platform RPM programs for HF. This study describes the implementation and outcomes of a dual platform RPM program for HF at a single centre. METHODS AND RESULTS: An RPM program was developed to include two platforms (e.g. CardioMEMS™ HF System and HeartLogic™ HF Diagnostic). To examine changes within each participant over time, study-related outcomes including total hospitalizations (TH), total length of stay (TLOS), cardiac hospitalizations (CH), cardiac LOS (CLOS), and cardiac-related emergency department (ED) visits were compared in two timeframes: 12 months pre-enrolment and post-enrolment into RPM. For 141 participants enrolled, there was a significant reduction in the likelihood of experiencing a CH by 19% (0.77 vs. 0.61 events/patient-year; HR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67-0.97, P = 0.03) and a cardiac-related ED visit by 28% (0.48 vs. 0.34 events/patient-year; HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.55-0.93, P = 0.01). There was also a 51% decrease (SE = 1.41, 95% CI: 2.79-8.38 days, P < 0.001) and 62% decrease (SE = 1.24, 95% CI: 3.35-8.22 days, P < 0.001) in TLOS and CLOS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A dual platform RPM program for HF using structured education, RPM-capable devices, and alert-specific medication titration reduces the likelihood of experiencing a cardiac hospitalization and cardiac-related ED visit in this single-centre study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Baginski et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Heart failure (n=141). Dual platform remote patient monitoring (RPM) program vs. 12 months pre-enrolment was evaluated on Cardiac hospitalizations (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.97, p=0.03). A dual platform remote patient monitoring program for heart failure reduced cardiac hospitalizations compared to the 12 months pre-enrolment (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.67-0.97; P=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: