ArticleJMIR cardio2021
Clinic Time Required for Remote and In-Person Management of Patients With Cardiac Devices: Time and Motion Workflow Evaluation.
Article in JMIR cardio, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alert-driven vs scheduled remote monitoring of implantable cardiac defibrillators: A cost-consequence analysis from the TRUST trial.Heart rhythm · 2023Trial
- Expert Consensus Statement: Committee on Implantable Devices and Committee on Social Issues, Japanese Heart Rhythm Society (JHRS) Statement on Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Implantable Loop Recorders in Pediatric Patients: Effects on Device Performance and Clinical Workflow in a Single-Center Experience.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Article
- Economic and clinical impact of diagnostic sensitivity for the use of insertable cardiac monitors to detect atrial fibrillation in cryptogenic stroke patients in the United Kingdom.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Telemedicine and 5G Technologies: A Systematic Global Review of Applications over the Past Decade.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Safety, performance, and remote programming utilization of an insertable cardiac monitor: The LUX-Dx PERFORM study.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- A Large, Real-World Cohort Analysis of Arrhythmia Detection and Therapeutic Interventions in Patients With Insertable Cardiac Monitors and Long-Term Monitoring.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Article
- Utilization and implementation of remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices in Australia and New Zealand: Adoption, workload, and integration challenges.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Algorithm Improvements in an Insertable Cardiac Monitor Reduce False Positives and Episode Review Burden.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2025Article
- Outcomes associated with remote monitoring without in-person evaluations for patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Real-world use of insertable cardiac monitor remote programming: A multicenter European experience.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- From Clinic to Cloud: Efficacy of AI-Assisted Remote Monitoring of Patients With Implantable Cardiac Devices.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2025Review
- Article
- Current practices in managing patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: Results of an international survey.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Continuous Monitoring with Implantable Loop Recorders After Cryoballoon Ablation: Impact on Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence and Therapeutic Management in Era of Artificial Intelligence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- ICM Implantation and Remote Follow-Up Management by Trained Nurses in Italian Hospitals: Current Practice and Nurse Feedback.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2025Article
- Efficiency Improvement of the Clinical Pathway in Cardiac Monitor Insertion and Follow-Up: Retrospective Analysis.JMIR cardio · 2025Article
- Current clinical practice versus remote monitoring recommendations for cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: A real-world analysis from a remote monitoring database.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Monitoring of Remotely Reprogrammable Implantable Loop Recorders With Algorithms to Reduce False-Positive Alerts.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe number of patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) is increasing, creating a substantial workload for device clinics.
objectiveThis study aims to characterize the workflow and quantify clinic staff time requirements for managing patients with CIEDs.
methodsA time and motion workflow evaluation was performed in 11 US and European CIEDs clinics. Workflow tasks were repeatedly timed during 1 business week of observation at each clinic; these observations included all device models and manufacturers. The mean cumulative staff time required to review a remote device transmission and an in-person clinic visit were calculated, including all necessary clinical and administrative tasks. The annual staff time to manage a patient with a CIED was modeled using CIED transmission volumes, clinical guidelines, and the published literature.
resultsA total of 276 in-person clinic visits and 2173 remote monitoring activities were observed. Mean staff time required per remote transmission ranged from 9.4 to 13.5 minutes for therapeutic devices (pacemaker, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and cardiac resynchronization therapy) and from 11.3 to 12.9 minutes for diagnostic devices such as insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs). Mean staff time per in-person visit ranged from 37.8 to 51.0 and from 39.9 to 45.8 minutes for therapeutic devices and ICMs, respectively. Including all remote and in-person follow-ups, the estimated annual time to manage a patient with a CIED ranged from 1.6 to 2.4 hours for therapeutic devices and from 7.7 to 9.3 hours for ICMs.
conclusionsThe CIED patient management workflow is complex and requires significant staff time. Understanding process steps and time requirements informs the implementation of efficiency improvements, including remote solutions. Future research should examine heterogeneity in patient management processes to identify the most efficient workflow.
Indexed as
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.