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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |