Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26835079›Full record

ArticleArrhythmia & electrophysiology review2014

Remote Monitoring for Follow-up of Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.

Renato Pietro Ricci, Loredana Morichelli, Niraj Varma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Implantable Cardiac Electronic Devices in the Elderly Population.Arrhythmia & electrophysiology review · 2019
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

3 authors.

Renato Pietro RicciDepartment of Cardiology, San Filippo Neri Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Loredana MorichelliDepartment of Cardiology, San Filippo Neri Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Niraj VarmaCardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, US.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Follow-up of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is challenging due to the increasing number and technical complexity of devices coupled to increasing clinical complexity of patients. Remote monitoring (RM) offers the opportunity to optimise clinic workflow and to improve device monitoring and patient management. Several randomised clinical trials and registries have demonstrated that RM may reduce number of hospital visits, time required for patient follow-up, physician and nurse time, hospital and social costs. Furthermore, patient retention and adherence to follow-up schedule are significantly improved by RM. Continuous wireless monitoring of data stored in the device memory with automatic alerts allows early detection of device malfunctions and of events requiring clinical reaction, such as atrial fibrillation, ventricular arrhythmias and heart failure. Early reaction may improve patient outcome. RM is easy to use and patients showed a high level of acceptance and satisfaction. Implementing RM in daily practice may require changes in clinic workflow. To this purpose, new organisational models have been introduced. In spite of a favourable cost:benefit ratio, RM reimbursement still represents an issue in several European countries.

Indexed as

atrial fibrillationCardiac implantable electronic devicesfollow-upheart failureimplantable cardioverter defibrillatorrecall managementremote monitoringventricular arrhythmias

Identifiers

PMID26835079
PMCPMC4711529

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.