ArticleHeart rhythm O22023
Impact of intensive follow-up of cardiac implantable electronic devices via remote monitoring: A pilot study.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy in Patients After Implantation of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators to Improve Outcomes.CJC open · 2026Article
- Heart Failure Alert Duration and Time at Risk of Heart Failure as Potential Modifier Factors of the TriageHF Algorithm in Remote Monitoring of Heart Failure: A Cohort Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- To the Editor - The promising future of remote monitoring for cardiac implantable electronic devices.Heart rhythm O2 · 2023Article
- Reply to the Editor - The promising future of remote monitoring for cardiac implantable electronic devices.Heart rhythm O2 · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The volume of remote monitoring (RM) data generates a significant workload and is generally dealt with by clinic staff during standard office hours, potentially delaying clinical action. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical efficiency and workflow of implementing intensive RM (IRM) in patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) when compared with standard RM (SRM). Methods: From a cohort of >1500 remotely monitored devices, 70 patients were randomly selected to undergo IRM. For comparison, an equal number of matched patients were prospectively selected for SRM. Intensive follow-up occurred via automated vendor-neutral software with rapid alert processing by International Board of Heart Rhythm Examiners-certified device specialists. Standard follow-up was conducted by clinic staff during office hours via individual device vendor interfaces. Alerts were categorized on the basis of the level of acuity as actionable (red [high], yellow [moderate]), or green [not requiring action]). Results: Over 9 months of follow-up, 922 remote transmissions were received; 339 (36.8%) were coded as actionable alerts (118 in IRM and 221 in SRM; Conclusion: Intensive and managed RM results in a significant reduction in time to review alerts and number of actionable alerts. Monitoring with enhanced alert adjudication is needed to facilitate device clinic efficiency and optimize patient care. Study Registration: ACTRN12621001275853.
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.