ReviewIndian pacing and electrophysiology journal
Cardiac implantable electronic devices remote monitoring service at National University Heart Centre, Singapore.
Review in Indian pacing and electrophysiology journal. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Remote monitoring (RM) is recommended as the standard of care in cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) management. RM allows the reduction of physical in-clinic visits during CIED follow-up, continuous monitoring and earlier detection of actionable events. Earlier studies have shown RM to be safe and effective in reducing all-cause mortality, unscheduled hospitalisations, Emergency Department and clinic visits, and inappropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies. Apart from pacemakers and ICDs, RM is also helpful in the earlier identification of bradyarrhythmias in unexplained syncope. Across the United States and Europe, RM has been shown to be cost-effective with increased cost-savings due to reduced hospitalisation costs. Patients on RM reported increased quality of life, convenience and satisfaction, with many preferring the use of RM in their follow-up care. However, the lack of healthcare system reimbursements and the need for adequate staffing may impede RM adoption. Despite its benefits, the uptake of RM is heterogenous and remains low in Asia. Challenges to the adoption of RM in Asia include access to healthcare, geographical location, socioeconomic status and the lack of RM infrastructure. This review discusses the benefits and challenges of RM, and describes the implementation of RM at the National University Heart Centre Singapore, an academic centre with 6 CIED clinics across 2 tertiary hospitals providing care to 1.5 million people in Western Singapore.
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.