Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27439396›Full record

ArticleSingapore medical journal2016

Remote monitoring of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: a Southeast Asian, single-centre pilot study.

Paul Chun Yih Lim, Audry Shan Yin Lee, Kelvin Chi Ming Chua, Eric Tien Siang Lim, Daniel Thuan Tee Chong, Boon Yew Tan, Kah Leng Ho, Wee Siong Teo, Chi Keong Ching

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Singapore medical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Paul Chun Yih LimDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Audry Shan Yin LeeDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Kelvin Chi Ming ChuaDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Eric Tien Siang LimDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Daniel Thuan Tee ChongDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Boon Yew TanDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Kah Leng HoDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Wee Siong TeoDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Chi Keong ChingDepartment of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
National Heart Centre Singapore · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRemote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) has been shown to improve patient safety and reduce in-office visits. We report our experience with remote monitoring via the Medtronic CareLink(®) network.

methodsPatients were followed up for six months with scheduled monthly remote monitoring transmissions in addition to routine in-office checks. The efficacy of remote monitoring was evaluated by recording compliance to transmissions, number of device alerts requiring intervention and time from transmission to review. Questionnaires were administered to evaluate the experiences of patients, physicians and medical technicians.

resultsA total of 57 patients were enrolled; 16 (28.1%) had permanent pacemakers, 34 (59.6%) had implantable cardioverter defibrillators and 7 (12.3%) had cardiac resynchronisation therapy defibrillators. Overall, of 334 remote transmissions scheduled, 73.7% were on time, 14.5% were overdue and 11.8% were missed. 84.6% of wireless transmissions were on time, compared to 53.8% of non-wireless transmissions. Among all transmissions, 4.4% contained alerts for which physicians were informed and only 1.8% required intervention. 98.6% of remote transmissions were reviewed by the second working day. 73.2% of patients preferred remote monitoring. Physicians agreed that remote transmissions provided information equivalent to in-office checks 97.1% of the time. 77.8% of medical technicians felt that remote monitoring would help the hospital improve patient management. No adverse events were reported.

conclusionRemote monitoring of CIED is safe and feasible. It has possible benefits to patient safety through earlier detection of arrhythmias or device malfunction, permitting earlier intervention. Wireless remote monitoring, in particular, may improve compliance to device monitoring. Patients may prefer remote monitoring due to possible improvements in quality of life.

Indexed as

Defibrillators, ImplantableAgedArrhythmias, CardiacFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicPacemaker, ArtificialPatient SafetyPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesQuality of LifeRemote ConsultationSingaporecardiac implantable electronic devicesremote monitoring

Identifiers

PMID27439396
PMCPMC4958713
OpenAlexW2479756007

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.