Comparison of Continuous ECG Monitoring by Wearable Patch Device and Conventional Telemonitoring Device

BACKGROUND: Detection of arrhythmias is crucial for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. However, conventional devices do not provide sufficient diagnostic accuracy while patients should suffer from bothersome diagnostic process. We sought to evaluate diagnostic capability and safety of the new adhesive electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring device in patients who need ECG monitoring during admission. METHODS: We enrolled 10 patients who admitted to Seoul National University Bundang Hospital and required continuous ECG monitoring between October 31, 2019 and December 18, 2019. New adhesive ECG monitoring device and conventional ECG monitoring device were simultaneously applied to the patients and maintained for 48 hours. From each patient, 48 pairs of ECG signal were collected and analyzed by two cardiologists independently. Discrepancy of diagnosis and frequency of noise or signal loss were compared between the two devices. RESULTS: From analyzable ECG data, discrepancy of arrhythmia diagnosis was not observed between the two devices. Noise rate was higher in conventional ECG monitoring device (2.5% vs. 17.3%, P < 0.001) and signal loss was not observed in new adhesive device while there was 9.4% of signal losses in conventional Holter recorder group. The new device was well-tolerated among 48 hours of monitoring period and no adverse event was observed. CONCLUSION: A newer adhesive ECG monitoring device demonstrated similar diagnostic accuracy compared to conventional ECG monitoring device.