ReviewEuropean heart journal. Digital health2025
Access and reimbursement of ambulatory cardiac monitoring across Europe.
Review in European heart journal. Digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Innovative Advances in Non-Invasive Detection Technologies for Heart Failure: Synergistic Application of Multimodal Sensing and Intelligent Algorithms.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- From Detection to Decision: Managing Device-Detected Atrial Fibrillation After Stroke.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ambulatory cardiac monitoring (ACM) allows long-term electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring to detect arrhythmias with different modalities, ranging from short-term Holter monitoring (up to 48 h) to long-term continuous patch ECG monitors (up to 14 days), external event recorders (up to 30 days), and implantable loop recorders (ILRs). Access and reimbursement for ACM across Europe are not well understood. We performed a systematic review and analysis to understand ACM reimbursement across Europe, including a review of the reimbursement systems in each country and a detailed inspection of clinical coding and provider reimbursement. Level of reimbursement is dependent on many factors, including clinical setting (inpatient, outpatient, and day case), hospital length of stay, diagnosis, complications/severity, geographical location, hospital type, and device model and manufacturer. In most countries, reimbursement is performed for the monitoring procedure itself, without considering the time extension of monitoring and the specific type of device used for monitoring. The monetary value of reimbursement varies by country for both ACM and ILR [for Holter from €17.49 to €939.78 and for ILR from €416.14 (provider reimbursement only) to €18,718 (provider reimbursement bundled with ILR device)]. Holter and ILR are universally reimbursed, but newer ACM technologies with extended duration of monitoring, including long-term continuous monitoring and event recorders, are not. Across Europe, we found large variation in monetary values for reimbursement for ACM and ILR. We also found limited reimbursement and access to longer-duration ACM technologies. These findings suggest heterogeneous and problematic access to evidence-based tools for longer-duration monitoring.
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.