OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine if wireless remote monitoring with automatic clinician alerts reduces the time from a clinical event to a clinical decision in response to arrhythmias, cardiovascular (CV) disease progression, and device issues compared to patients receiving standard in-office care. A secondary objective was to compare the rates of CV health care utilization between patients in the remote and in-office arms. BACKGROUND: In addition to providing life-saving therapy, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators collect advanced diagnostics on the progression of the patient's heart disease. Device technology has progressed to allow wireless remote monitoring with automatic clinician alerts to replace some scheduled in-office visits. METHODS: The CONNECT (Clinical Evaluation of Remote Notification to Reduce Time to Clinical Decision) study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized evaluation involving 1,997 patients from 136 clinical sites who underwent insertion of animplantable cardioverter-defibrillator (including cardiac resynchronization therapy devices) and were followed up for 15 months. Health care utilization data included all CV-related hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and clinic office visits. RESULTS: The median time from clinical event to clinical decision per patient was reduced from 22 days in the in-office arm to 4.6 days in the remote arm (p < 0.001). The health care utilization data revealed a decrease in mean length of stay per CV hospitalization visit from 4.0 days in the in-office arm to 3.3 days in the remote arm (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Wireless remote monitoring with automatic clinician alerts as compared with standard in-office follow-up significantly reduced the time to a clinical decision in response to clinical events and was associated with a significant reduction in mean length of CV hospital stay. (Clinical Evaluation of Remote Notification to Reduce Time to Clinical Decision [CONNECT]; NCT00402246).
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine if wireless remote monitoring with automatic clinician alerts reduces the time from a clinical event to a clinical decision in response to arrhythmias, cardiovascular (CV) disease progression, and device issues compared to patients receiving standard in-office care. A secondary objective was to compare the rates of CV health care utilization between patients in the remote and in-office arms. BACKGROUND: In addition to providing life-saving therapy, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators collect advanced diagnostics on the progression of the patient's heart disease. Device technology has progressed to allow wireless remote monitoring with automatic clinician alerts to replace some scheduled in-office visits. METHODS: The CONNECT (Clinical Evaluation of Remote Notification to Reduce Time to Clinical Decision) study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized evaluation involving 1,997 patients from 136 clinical sites who underwent insertion of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (including cardiac resynchronization therapy devices) and were followed up for 15 months. Health care utilization data included all CV-related hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and clinic office visits. RESULTS: The median time from clinical event to clinical decision per patient was reduced from 22 days in the in-office arm to 4.6 days in the remote arm (p < 0.001). The health care utilization data revealed a decrease in mean length of stay per CV hospitalization visit from 4.0 days in the in-office arm to 3.3 days in the remote arm (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Wireless remote monitoring with automatic clinician alerts as compared with standard in-office follow-up significantly reduced the time to a clinical decision in response to clinical events and was associated with a significant reduction in mean length of CV hospital stay. (Clinical Evaluation of Remote Notification to Reduce Time to Clinical Decision [CONNECT]; NCT00402246).
Authors: Paul Chun Yih Lim; Audry Shan Yin Lee; Kelvin Chi Ming Chua; Eric Tien Siang Lim; Daniel Thuan Tee Chong; Boon Yew Tan; Kah Leng Ho; Wee Siong Teo; Chi Keong Ching Journal: Singapore Med J Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 1.858
Authors: Renato P Ricci; Alfredo Vicentini; Antonio D'Onofrio; Antonio Sagone; Antonio Vincenti; Luigi Padeletti; Loredana Morichelli; Antonio Fusco; Filippo Vecchione; Francesco Lo Presti; Alessandra Denaro; Annalisa Pollastrelli; Massimo Santini Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2013-09-21 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: E Ray Dorsey; Alistair M Glidden; Melissa R Holloway; Gretchen L Birbeck; Lee H Schwamm Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: T M Helms; M Stockburger; J O Schwab; G Hindricks; F Köhler; V Leonhardt; A Müller; K Rybak; S Sack; C Zugck; B Zippel-Schultz; C A Perings Journal: Herzschrittmacherther Elektrophysiol Date: 2019-09
Authors: Mateusz Tajstra; Adam Sokal; Arkadiusz Gwóźdź; Marcin Wilczek; Adam Gacek; Konrad Wojciechowski; Elżbieta Gadula-Gacek; Elżbieta Adamowicz-Czoch; Katarzyna Chłosta-Niepiekło; Krzysztof Milewski; Piotr Rozentryt; Zbigniew Kalarus; Mariusz Gąsior; Lech Poloński Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2016-12-25 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Abigale L Ottenberg; Keith M Swetz; Luke A Mueller; Samantha Gerhardson; Paul S Mueller Journal: Heart Lung Date: 2013-04-10 Impact factor: 2.210