ArticleJournal of cardiovascular electrophysiology2025
ICM Implantation and Remote Follow-Up Management by Trained Nurses in Italian Hospitals: Current Practice and Nurse Feedback.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThis project aimed to evaluate current practices of trained nurses performing implantable cardiac monitor (ICM) implantations and remote follow-ups in Italy, assessing hospital protocols and nurses' perceptions.
methodsAn anonymous survey was conducted among 163 trained nurses across 75 Italian hospitals, focusing on their ICM implantation and remote monitoring practices. Data collected included hospital characteristics and protocols, barriers to implementation, and nurses' feedback on their experiences.
resultsOf the 112 respondents (69% response rate), 60% reported that nurses in their hospitals are authorized to perform ICM implantations, and 70% said that they can manage all remote monitoring tasks. Thirty-three (29%) nurses manage all aspects of ICM patient care, including implantation, programming, enrollment in remote monitoring, training, data review, and follow-up. Fifty-five percent of nurses perform a part of ICM implants outside the EP/Cath lab, and for 31%, this is the primary location. 84% of implanter nurses achieved autonomy after < 10 supervised implants. More than 90% of implanter nurses consider ICM implantation rewarding and 96% find it safe and easy with the provided kit. However, only 33% and 17% of nurses had written protocols at their hospital, to guide ICM implantation and remote monitoring, respectively.
conclusionsNurse-led ICM implantation and remote follow-up are becoming established practices in Italy, with many nurses operating independently. Despite this progress, the absence of standard operating procedures limits the widespread adoption of these practices. Clear national and international protocols are essential to enhance nurse training, ensure safe practices, and ultimately improve patient care in ICM management.
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.