Cargando…

Fully digital data processing during cardiovascular implantable electronic device follow-up in a high-volume tertiary center

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and limited follow-up capacities highlight unmet challenges in clinical electrophysiology. Integrated software (MediConnect(®)) enabling fully digital processing of device interrogation data has bee...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Staudacher, Ingo, Nalpathamkalam, Asha Roy, Uhlmann, Lorenz, Illg, Claudius, Seehausen, Sebastian, Akhavanpoor, Mohammadreza, Buchauer, Anke, Geis, Nicolas, Lugenbiel, Patrick, Schweizer, Patrick A., Xynogalos, Panagiotis, Zylla, Maura M., Scholz, Eberhard, Zitron, Edgar, Katus, Hugo A., Thomas, Dierk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5637082/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29020984
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40001-017-0284-7
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and limited follow-up capacities highlight unmet challenges in clinical electrophysiology. Integrated software (MediConnect(®)) enabling fully digital processing of device interrogation data has been commercially developed to facilitate follow-up visits. We sought to assess feasibility of fully digital data processing (FDDP) during ambulatory device follow-up in a high-volume tertiary hospital to provide guidance for future users of FDDP software. METHODS: A total of 391 patients (mean age, 70 years) presenting to the outpatient department for routine device follow-up were analyzed (pacemaker, 44%; implantable cardioverter defibrillator, 39%; cardiac resynchronization therapy device, 16%). RESULTS: Quality of data transfer and follow-up duration were compared between digital (n = 265) and manual processing of device data (n = 126). Digital data import was successful, complete and correct in 82% of cases when early software versions were used. When using the most recent software version the rate of successful digital data import increased to 100%. Software-based import of interrogation data was complete and without failure in 97% of cases. The mean duration of a follow-up visit did not differ between the two groups (digital 18.7 min vs. manual data transfer 18.2 min). CONCLUSIONS: FDDP software was successfully implemented into the ambulatory follow-up of patients with implanted pacemakers and defibrillators. Digital data import into electronic patient management software was feasible and supported the physician’s workflow. The total duration of follow-up visits comprising technical device interrogation and clinical actions was not affected in the present tertiary center outpatient cohort.