Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37361614›Full record

ArticleHeart rhythm O22023

Data deluge from remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices and importance of clinical stratification.

Danish Bawa, Rajesh Kabra, Adnan Ahmed, Shanti Bansal, Douglas Darden, Naga Venkata K Pothineni, Rakesh Gopinathannair, Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 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. Article
  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

8 authors.

Danish BawaDepartment of Electrophysiology, Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute, Overland Park, Kansas.
Rajesh KabraDepartment of Electrophysiology, Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute, Overland Park, Kansas.
Adnan AhmedDepartment of Electrophysiology, Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute, Overland Park, Kansas.
Shanti BansalDepartment of Electrophysiology, Houston Heart Rhythm and Octagos Health, Houston, Texas.
Douglas DardenDepartment of Electrophysiology, Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute, Overland Park, Kansas.
Naga Venkata K PothineniDepartment of Electrophysiology, Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute, Overland Park, Kansas.
Rakesh GopinathannairDepartment of Electrophysiology, Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute, Overland Park, Kansas.
Dhanunjaya LakkireddyDepartment of Electrophysiology, Kansas City Heart Rhythm Institute, Overland Park, Kansas.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Remote monitoring (RM) has been accepted as a standard of care for follow-up of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). However, the resulting data deluge poses major challenge to device clinics. Objective: This study aimed to quantify the data deluge from CIED and stratify these data based on clinical relevance. Methods: The study included patients from 67 device clinics across the United States being remotely monitored by Octagos Health. The CIEDs included implantable loop recorders, pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers. Transmissions were either dismissed before reaching the clinical practice if they were repetitive or redundant or were forwarded if they were either clinically relevant or actionable transmission (alert). The alerts were further classified as level 1, 2, or 3 based on clinical urgency. Results: A total of 32,721 patients with CIEDs were included. There were 14,465 (44.2%) patients with pacemakers, 8381 (25.6%) with implantable loop recorders, 5351 (16.4%) with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, 3531 (10.8%) with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators, and 993 (3%) with cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers. Over a period of 2 years of RM, 384,796 transmissions were received. Of these, 220,049 (57%) transmissions were dismissed, as they were either redundant or repetitive. Only 164,747 (43%) transmissions were transmitted to the clinicians, of which only 13% (n = 50,440) had clinical alerts, while 30.6% (n = 114,307) were routine transmissions. Conclusion: Our study shows that data deluge from RM of CIEDs can be streamlined by utilization of appropriate screening strategies that will enhance efficiency of device clinics and provide better patient care.

Indexed as

AlertsCardiac implantable electronic deviceData delugeEfficiencyRemote monitoringRemote transmissions

Identifiers

PMID37361614
PMCPMC10288027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.