ArticleCJC open2021
Remote Monitoring of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Canada: Survey of Patients and Device Health Care Professionals.
Article in CJC open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recommendations for sharing cardiovascular implantable electronic device data with patients based on clinician interviews.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Facilitators and Barriers to Uptake of Remote Cardiac Monitoring in a Rural Setting: A Qualitative Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- International survey of cardiac device clinic staff determining patient-perceived challenges with remote monitoring.Acta cardiologica · 2025Article
- Article
- Automated fibrosis segmentation from wideband post-contrastMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Infections of cardiac implantable electrical devices.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024Article
- Data deluge from remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices and importance of clinical stratification.Heart rhythm O2 · 2023Article
- 2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic.Journal of arrhythmia · 2023Article
- 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 · 2023Article
- Remote Patient Monitoring: What Have We Learned and Where Are We Going?Current cardiovascular risk reports · 2023Review
- Remote Monitoring of CIEDs-For Both Safety, Economy and Convenience?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Article
- Deactivation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRemote monitoring is used to supplement in-clinic follow-up for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) every 6-12 months. There is a need to optimize remote management for CIEDs because of the consistent increases in CIED implants over the past decade. The objective of this study was to investigate real and perceived barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada and to better understand how remote models of care can be optimized.
methodsWe surveyed 512 CIED patients and practitioners in 22 device clinics in Canada.
resultsDevice clinic surveys highlighted significant variation and inconsistency in follow-up care for in-clinic and remote visits across and within clinics. This survey showed that funding policies and management of additional workflow are barriers to optimal use and uptake. Despite this, device clinics perceive remote follow-up as a valuable resource and an efficient way to manage patient follow-up. Patients were broadly satisfied with their CIED follow-up care but identified barriers related to coordination of care, visit logistics, and information needs. Views varied as a function of clinical or sociodemographic characteristics. Most patients (n = 228; 91%) expressed a desire to receive a phone call from their device clinic after a remote transmission has been received.
conclusionsLack of a unified, guideline-supported approach to follow-up after CIED implant, and discrepant funding policies across jurisdictions, are significant barriers to the use of remote patient management strategies in Canada. Efforts to increase or expand use of remote follow-up must recognize these barriers and the needs of specific subgroups of patients.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.