Cargando…

Comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ECG patches

BACKGROUND: Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, direct-to-patient, self-applied ECG patch use has substantially increased. There are limited data comparing clinic with self-applied electrocardiogram (ECG) patches. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goergen, Jack A., Peigh, Graham, Hsu, Mike, Wilk, Alan, Nayak, Tanvi, Crosson, Lori, Lenane, Judith, Knight, Bradley P., Passman, Rod
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Heart Rhythm Society. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714183/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36464126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.11.020
_version_ 1784842167951294464
author Goergen, Jack A.
Peigh, Graham
Hsu, Mike
Wilk, Alan
Nayak, Tanvi
Crosson, Lori
Lenane, Judith
Knight, Bradley P.
Passman, Rod
author_facet Goergen, Jack A.
Peigh, Graham
Hsu, Mike
Wilk, Alan
Nayak, Tanvi
Crosson, Lori
Lenane, Judith
Knight, Bradley P.
Passman, Rod
author_sort Goergen, Jack A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, direct-to-patient, self-applied ECG patch use has substantially increased. There are limited data comparing clinic with self-applied electrocardiogram (ECG) patches. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare rates of ECG patch return, percentages of time patches yielded analyzable data (analyzable time), and percentages of prescribed time ECG patches were worn between clinic and self-applied ECG patches before and during COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients prescribed an ECG patch during “pre-COVID” (March 1, 2019, through March 1, 2020) and “COVID” (April 4, 2020, through April 1, 2021) years was performed. ECG patch return rates, mean percentages of analyzable time, and mean percentages of prescribed wear time were compared between clinic and self-applied groups. RESULTS: Among the 29,093 ECG patch prescriptions (19% COVID self-applied), the COVID self-applied group had a lower return rate (90.8%) than did both clinic-applied groups (COVID: 97.1%; pre-COVID: 98.1%; P < .001). Among the 28,048 ECG patches (17.5% self-applied) returned for analysis, the COVID self-applied group demonstrated a lower mean percentage of analyzable time (95.9% ± 8.2%) than did both clinic-applied groups (COVID: 96.6% ± 6.6%; pre-COVID 96.6% ± 7.4%; P < .001). There were no differences in the mean percentage of prescribed wear time between groups (pre-COVID clinic-applied: 96.7% ± 34.3%; COVID clinic-applied: 97.4% ± 39.8%; COVID self-applied: 98.1% ± 52.1%; P = .09). CONCLUSION: Self-applied ECG patches were returned at a lower rate and had a statistically lower percentage of analyzable time than clinic-applied patches. However, there were no differences between groups in mean percentages of prescribed wear time, and mean percentages of analyzable time were >95% in all groups.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9714183
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Heart Rhythm Society.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97141832022-12-01 Comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ECG patches Goergen, Jack A. Peigh, Graham Hsu, Mike Wilk, Alan Nayak, Tanvi Crosson, Lori Lenane, Judith Knight, Bradley P. Passman, Rod Heart Rhythm Clinical BACKGROUND: Since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, direct-to-patient, self-applied ECG patch use has substantially increased. There are limited data comparing clinic with self-applied electrocardiogram (ECG) patches. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare rates of ECG patch return, percentages of time patches yielded analyzable data (analyzable time), and percentages of prescribed time ECG patches were worn between clinic and self-applied ECG patches before and during COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients prescribed an ECG patch during “pre-COVID” (March 1, 2019, through March 1, 2020) and “COVID” (April 4, 2020, through April 1, 2021) years was performed. ECG patch return rates, mean percentages of analyzable time, and mean percentages of prescribed wear time were compared between clinic and self-applied groups. RESULTS: Among the 29,093 ECG patch prescriptions (19% COVID self-applied), the COVID self-applied group had a lower return rate (90.8%) than did both clinic-applied groups (COVID: 97.1%; pre-COVID: 98.1%; P < .001). Among the 28,048 ECG patches (17.5% self-applied) returned for analysis, the COVID self-applied group demonstrated a lower mean percentage of analyzable time (95.9% ± 8.2%) than did both clinic-applied groups (COVID: 96.6% ± 6.6%; pre-COVID 96.6% ± 7.4%; P < .001). There were no differences in the mean percentage of prescribed wear time between groups (pre-COVID clinic-applied: 96.7% ± 34.3%; COVID clinic-applied: 97.4% ± 39.8%; COVID self-applied: 98.1% ± 52.1%; P = .09). CONCLUSION: Self-applied ECG patches were returned at a lower rate and had a statistically lower percentage of analyzable time than clinic-applied patches. However, there were no differences between groups in mean percentages of prescribed wear time, and mean percentages of analyzable time were >95% in all groups. Heart Rhythm Society. 2023-03 2022-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9714183/ /pubmed/36464126 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.11.020 Text en © 2022 Heart Rhythm Society. All rights reserved. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Clinical
Goergen, Jack A.
Peigh, Graham
Hsu, Mike
Wilk, Alan
Nayak, Tanvi
Crosson, Lori
Lenane, Judith
Knight, Bradley P.
Passman, Rod
Comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ECG patches
title Comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ECG patches
title_full Comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ECG patches
title_fullStr Comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ECG patches
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ECG patches
title_short Comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ECG patches
title_sort comparison of data quality and monitoring completion rates between clinic and self-applied ecg patches
topic Clinical
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714183/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36464126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.11.020
work_keys_str_mv AT goergenjacka comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches
AT peighgraham comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches
AT hsumike comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches
AT wilkalan comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches
AT nayaktanvi comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches
AT crossonlori comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches
AT lenanejudith comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches
AT knightbradleyp comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches
AT passmanrod comparisonofdataqualityandmonitoringcompletionratesbetweenclinicandselfappliedecgpatches