Cargando…

Real‐World Disparities in Remote Follow‐Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Single‐Center Experience

BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices has been shown to improve cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. To date, no studies have investigated disparities in use and delivery of RM. This study was performed to investigate if racial and socioeconomic disparities...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lehmann, H. Immo, Sharma, Krishan, Bhatia, Roma, Mills, Theresa, Lang, Joshua, Li, Guoping, Andrews, Carl, Cullivan, Jay, Singh, Jagmeet, Mela, Theofanie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9973665/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36688364
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.027500
_version_ 1784898577997234176
author Lehmann, H. Immo
Sharma, Krishan
Bhatia, Roma
Mills, Theresa
Lang, Joshua
Li, Guoping
Andrews, Carl
Cullivan, Jay
Singh, Jagmeet
Mela, Theofanie
author_facet Lehmann, H. Immo
Sharma, Krishan
Bhatia, Roma
Mills, Theresa
Lang, Joshua
Li, Guoping
Andrews, Carl
Cullivan, Jay
Singh, Jagmeet
Mela, Theofanie
author_sort Lehmann, H. Immo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices has been shown to improve cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. To date, no studies have investigated disparities in use and delivery of RM. This study was performed to investigate if racial and socioeconomic disparities are present in cardiac implantable electronic device RM. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study at a single tertiary care center in the United States. Patients who received a newly implanted cardiac implantable electronic device or device upgrade between January 2017 and December 2020 were included. Patients were classified as RM positive (RM+) when they underwent at least ≥2 remote interrogations per year during follow‐up. Of all eligible patients, 2520 patients were included, and 34% were women. The mean follow‐up was 25 months. Mean age was 71±14 years. Pacemakers constituted 66% of implanted devices, whereas 26% were implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators, and 8% were cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators. Most patients (83%) were of European American ancestry. During follow‐up, 66% of patients were classified as RM+. Patients who were younger, European American, college‐educated, lived in a county with higher median household income, and were active on the hospital's patient portals were more frequently RM+. In an adjusted regression model, RM+ remained associated with the use of the online patient portal (odds ratio [OR], 2.889 [95% CI, 2.387–3.497]), presence of an implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (OR, 1.489 [95% CI, 1.207–1.835]), advanced college degree (OR, 1.244 [95% CI, 1.014–1.527]), and lastly with European American ancestry (P<0.05). During the years of the COVID‐19 pandemic, the number of RM+ patients increased, whereas the association with ancestry and ethnicity decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being offered to all patients at implantation, significant disparities were present in cardiovascular implantable electronic device RM in this cohort. Disparities were partly reversed during COVID‐19. Further studies are needed to examine health center‐ and patient‐specific factors to overcome these barriers, and to facilitate equal opportunities to participate in RM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9973665
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99736652023-03-01 Real‐World Disparities in Remote Follow‐Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Single‐Center Experience Lehmann, H. Immo Sharma, Krishan Bhatia, Roma Mills, Theresa Lang, Joshua Li, Guoping Andrews, Carl Cullivan, Jay Singh, Jagmeet Mela, Theofanie J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices has been shown to improve cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. To date, no studies have investigated disparities in use and delivery of RM. This study was performed to investigate if racial and socioeconomic disparities are present in cardiac implantable electronic device RM. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study at a single tertiary care center in the United States. Patients who received a newly implanted cardiac implantable electronic device or device upgrade between January 2017 and December 2020 were included. Patients were classified as RM positive (RM+) when they underwent at least ≥2 remote interrogations per year during follow‐up. Of all eligible patients, 2520 patients were included, and 34% were women. The mean follow‐up was 25 months. Mean age was 71±14 years. Pacemakers constituted 66% of implanted devices, whereas 26% were implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators, and 8% were cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators. Most patients (83%) were of European American ancestry. During follow‐up, 66% of patients were classified as RM+. Patients who were younger, European American, college‐educated, lived in a county with higher median household income, and were active on the hospital's patient portals were more frequently RM+. In an adjusted regression model, RM+ remained associated with the use of the online patient portal (odds ratio [OR], 2.889 [95% CI, 2.387–3.497]), presence of an implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (OR, 1.489 [95% CI, 1.207–1.835]), advanced college degree (OR, 1.244 [95% CI, 1.014–1.527]), and lastly with European American ancestry (P<0.05). During the years of the COVID‐19 pandemic, the number of RM+ patients increased, whereas the association with ancestry and ethnicity decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being offered to all patients at implantation, significant disparities were present in cardiovascular implantable electronic device RM in this cohort. Disparities were partly reversed during COVID‐19. Further studies are needed to examine health center‐ and patient‐specific factors to overcome these barriers, and to facilitate equal opportunities to participate in RM. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-01-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9973665/ /pubmed/36688364 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.027500 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Lehmann, H. Immo
Sharma, Krishan
Bhatia, Roma
Mills, Theresa
Lang, Joshua
Li, Guoping
Andrews, Carl
Cullivan, Jay
Singh, Jagmeet
Mela, Theofanie
Real‐World Disparities in Remote Follow‐Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Single‐Center Experience
title Real‐World Disparities in Remote Follow‐Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Single‐Center Experience
title_full Real‐World Disparities in Remote Follow‐Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Single‐Center Experience
title_fullStr Real‐World Disparities in Remote Follow‐Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Single‐Center Experience
title_full_unstemmed Real‐World Disparities in Remote Follow‐Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Single‐Center Experience
title_short Real‐World Disparities in Remote Follow‐Up of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices and Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Single‐Center Experience
title_sort real‐world disparities in remote follow‐up of cardiac implantable electronic devices and impact of the covid‐19 pandemic: a single‐center experience
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9973665/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36688364
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.027500
work_keys_str_mv AT lehmannhimmo realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT sharmakrishan realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT bhatiaroma realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT millstheresa realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT langjoshua realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT liguoping realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT andrewscarl realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT cullivanjay realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT singhjagmeet realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience
AT melatheofanie realworlddisparitiesinremotefollowupofcardiacimplantableelectronicdevicesandimpactofthecovid19pandemicasinglecenterexperience