Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24614572›Full record

Trial reportEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2014

Costs of remote monitoring vs. ambulatory follow-ups of implanted cardioverter defibrillators in the randomized ECOST study.

Laurence Guédon-Moreau, Dominique Lacroix, Nicolas Sadoul, Jacques Clémenty, Claude Kouakam, Jean-Sylvain Hermida, Etienne Aliot, Salem Kacet, ECOST trial Investigators

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00989417 (Effectiveness and Cost Of ICD Follow-up Schedule With Telecardiology), which is not on this map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00989417 nacompletednot on this map

Effectiveness and Cost Of ICD Follow-up Schedule With Telecardiology

TypeinterventionalSponsorBiotronik SE & Co. KGRan2007 to 2010Enrolled473ConditionsImplantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators, Ventricular Fibrillation, Tachycardia, VentricularArmsACTIVATION of HOME MONITORING
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. The digital journey: 25 years of digital development in electrophysiology from an Europace perspective.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023
    Review
  17. Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices and disease management.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Laurence Guédon-MoreauCentre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, F-59037 Lille, France laurence.guedon@chru-lille.fr.
Dominique LacroixCentre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, F-59037 Lille, France.
Nicolas SadoulCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Brabois, F-54500 Nancy, France.
Jacques ClémentyCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Haut-Lévêque, F-33064 Pessac, France.
Claude KouakamCentre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, F-59037 Lille, France.
Jean-Sylvain HermidaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire, F-80054 Amiens, France.
Etienne AliotCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Brabois, F-54500 Nancy, France.
Salem KacetCentre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, F-59037 Lille, France.
ECOST trial Investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe Effectiveness and Cost of ICD follow-up Schedule with Telecardiology (ECOST) trial evaluated prospectively the economic impact of long-term remote monitoring (RM) of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). METHODS AND

resultsThe analysis included 310 patients randomly assigned to RM (active group) vs. ambulatory follow-ups (control group). Patients in the active group were seen once a year unless the system reported an event mandating an ambulatory visit, while patients in the control group were seen in the ambulatory department every 6 months. The costs of each follow-up strategy were compared, using the actual billing documents issued by the French health insurance system, including costs of (i) (a) ICD-related ambulatory visits and transportation, (b) other ambulatory visits, (c) cardiovascular treatments and procedures, and (ii) hospitalizations for the management of cardiovascular events. The ICD and RM system costs were calculated on the basis of the device remaining longevity at the end of the study. The characteristics of the study groups were similar. Over a follow-up of 27 months, the mean non-hospital costs per patient-year were €1695 ± 1131 in the active, vs. €1952 ± 1023 in the control group (P = 0.04), a €257 difference mainly due to device management. The hospitalization costs per patient-year were €2829 ± 6382 and €3549 ± 9714 in the active and control groups, respectively (P = 0.46). Adding the ICD to the non-hospital costs, the savings were €494 (P = 0.005) or, when the monitoring system was included, €315 (P = 0.05) per patient-year.

conclusionFrom the French health insurance perspective, the remote management of ICD patients is cost saving. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT00989417, www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsAgedAmbulatory CareCost-Benefit AnalysisCost SavingsDefibrillators, ImplantableElectric CountershockFemaleFranceHealth ExpendituresHospital CostsHumansInsurance, Health, ReimbursementMaleMiddle AgedOffice VisitsCost analysisCostsImplantable cardioverter defibrillatorRemote monitoringTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID24614572
PMCPMC4114330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.