Cargando…
Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations
AIMS: To test recommended implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) follow-up methods by ‘in-person evaluations’ (IPE) vs. ‘remote Home Monitoring’ (HM). METHODS AND RESULTS: ICD patients were randomized 2:1 to automatic HM or to Conventional monitoring, with follow-up checks scheduled at 3, 6, 9...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4028610/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24595864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu066 |
_version_ | 1782317092564893696 |
---|---|
author | Varma, Niraj Michalski, Justin Stambler, Bruce Pavri, Behzad B. |
author_facet | Varma, Niraj Michalski, Justin Stambler, Bruce Pavri, Behzad B. |
author_sort | Varma, Niraj |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: To test recommended implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) follow-up methods by ‘in-person evaluations’ (IPE) vs. ‘remote Home Monitoring’ (HM). METHODS AND RESULTS: ICD patients were randomized 2:1 to automatic HM or to Conventional monitoring, with follow-up checks scheduled at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months post-implant. Conventional patients were evaluated with IPE only. Home Monitoring patients were assessed remotely only for 1 year between 3 and 15 month evaluations. Adherence to follow-up was measured. HM and Conventional patients were similar (age 63 years, 72% male, left ventricular ejection fraction 29%, primary prevention 73%, DDD 57%). Conventional management suffered greater patient attrition during the trial (20.1 vs. 14.2% in HM, P = 0.007). Three month follow-up occurred in 84% in both groups. There was 100% adherence (5 of 5 checks) in 47.3% Conventional vs. 59.7% HM (P < 0.001). Between 3 and 15 months, HM exhibited superior (2.2×) adherence to scheduled follow-up [incidence of failed follow up was 146 of 2421 (6.0%) in HM vs. 145 of 1098 (13.2%) in Conventional, P < 0.001] and punctuality. In HM (daily transmission success rate median 91%), transmission loss caused only 22 of 2275 (0.97%) failed HM evaluations between 3 and 15 months; others resulted from clinic oversight. Overall IPE failure rate in Conventional [193 of 1841 (10.5%) exceeded that in HM [97 of 1484 (6.5%), P < 0.001] by 62%, i.e. HM patients remained more loyal to IPE when this was mandated. CONCLUSION: Automatic remote monitoring better preserves patient retention and adherence to scheduled follow-up compared with IPE. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00336284. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4028610 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-40286102014-05-21 Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations Varma, Niraj Michalski, Justin Stambler, Bruce Pavri, Behzad B. Eur Heart J Clinical Research AIMS: To test recommended implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) follow-up methods by ‘in-person evaluations’ (IPE) vs. ‘remote Home Monitoring’ (HM). METHODS AND RESULTS: ICD patients were randomized 2:1 to automatic HM or to Conventional monitoring, with follow-up checks scheduled at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months post-implant. Conventional patients were evaluated with IPE only. Home Monitoring patients were assessed remotely only for 1 year between 3 and 15 month evaluations. Adherence to follow-up was measured. HM and Conventional patients were similar (age 63 years, 72% male, left ventricular ejection fraction 29%, primary prevention 73%, DDD 57%). Conventional management suffered greater patient attrition during the trial (20.1 vs. 14.2% in HM, P = 0.007). Three month follow-up occurred in 84% in both groups. There was 100% adherence (5 of 5 checks) in 47.3% Conventional vs. 59.7% HM (P < 0.001). Between 3 and 15 months, HM exhibited superior (2.2×) adherence to scheduled follow-up [incidence of failed follow up was 146 of 2421 (6.0%) in HM vs. 145 of 1098 (13.2%) in Conventional, P < 0.001] and punctuality. In HM (daily transmission success rate median 91%), transmission loss caused only 22 of 2275 (0.97%) failed HM evaluations between 3 and 15 months; others resulted from clinic oversight. Overall IPE failure rate in Conventional [193 of 1841 (10.5%) exceeded that in HM [97 of 1484 (6.5%), P < 0.001] by 62%, i.e. HM patients remained more loyal to IPE when this was mandated. CONCLUSION: Automatic remote monitoring better preserves patient retention and adherence to scheduled follow-up compared with IPE. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00336284. Oxford University Press 2014-05-21 2014-03-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4028610/ /pubmed/24595864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu066 Text en © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Clinical Research Varma, Niraj Michalski, Justin Stambler, Bruce Pavri, Behzad B. Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations |
title | Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations |
title_full | Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations |
title_fullStr | Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations |
title_full_unstemmed | Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations |
title_short | Superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled ICD follow-up in the TRUST trial - testing execution of the recommendations |
title_sort | superiority of automatic remote monitoring compared with in-person evaluation for scheduled icd follow-up in the trust trial - testing execution of the recommendations |
topic | Clinical Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4028610/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24595864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu066 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT varmaniraj superiorityofautomaticremotemonitoringcomparedwithinpersonevaluationforscheduledicdfollowupinthetrusttrialtestingexecutionoftherecommendations AT michalskijustin superiorityofautomaticremotemonitoringcomparedwithinpersonevaluationforscheduledicdfollowupinthetrusttrialtestingexecutionoftherecommendations AT stamblerbruce superiorityofautomaticremotemonitoringcomparedwithinpersonevaluationforscheduledicdfollowupinthetrusttrialtestingexecutionoftherecommendations AT pavribehzadb superiorityofautomaticremotemonitoringcomparedwithinpersonevaluationforscheduledicdfollowupinthetrusttrialtestingexecutionoftherecommendations AT superiorityofautomaticremotemonitoringcomparedwithinpersonevaluationforscheduledicdfollowupinthetrusttrialtestingexecutionoftherecommendations |